243 réponses à ce sujet

[Guldor]

I often read comments, from those who like DA2, trying to understand why they like it and sometimes why they find it better then DAO. Not liking DA2 myself, I was trying to see what they saw in it. From my POV it is/seems so flawed so perhaps I was missing something.
Why do they like DA2, I asked myself. The combat..really?, the story..which story? Anyways, going on wikipedia(yes sometimes not reliable) I found some funny definitions that might explain why it felt so wrong for me:


http://en.wikipedia....ying_video_game

"...Players explore a game world, while solving puzzles and engaging in tactical combat. A key feature of the genre is that characters grow in power and abilities, and characters are typically designed by the player.[1] RPGs rarely challenge a player's physical coordination, with the exception of action role-playing games(OP: we will see the def below).[3] 
Role-playing video games typically rely on a highly developed story and setting,[4] which is divided into a number of quests. Players control one or several characters by issuing commands, which is performed by the character at an effectiveness determined by that character's numeric attributes. Often these attributes increase each time a character gains a level, and a character's level goes up each time the player accumulates a certain amount of experience.[5]
Role-playing video games also typically attempt to offer more complex and dynamic character interaction than what is found in other video game genres. This usually involves additional focus on the artificial intelligence and scripted behavior of computer-controlled non-player characters."




That definition is totally what I enjoy about RPGs. Lets see what that 'action RPG" is about:
http://en.wikipedia....le-playing_game

"Action role-playing games (abbreviated action RPG, action/RPG, or ARPG) form a loosely-defined sub-genre of role-playing video games that incorporate elements of action or action-adventure games, emphasizing real-time action that requires direct input from the player, instead of turn-based or menu-based combat. These games often use combat systems similar to hack and slash or shooter games."

Direct input, hack and slash...sounds familiar...
Further down the definition:

"...An important influence on the genre was the 1986 action-adventure game, The Legend of Zelda, which is often not considered an action RPG since it lacked key RPG mechanics like experience points, but had many features in common with RPGs and served as the template for future action RPGs.[25] In contrast to previous action RPGs such as Dragon Slayer and Hydlide which required the player to bump into enemies in order to attack them, The Legend of Zelda featured an attack button that animates a sword swing or projectile attack on the screen."



Well well well...I wont make that post 10 pages long but seeing the list of games associated with action-rpgs I know now why I didnt like DA2 and perhaps I understand why people enjoyed despite having the option of playing DAO.


Of course personal preferences are always subjective but in trying to understand why other people liked it I had DA2 categorized in RPGs, and therefore I couldnt help comparing it to DAO, KOTOR, BG, etc when in fact its mostly an action rpg. I enjoyed Legend of Zelda, Secret of Mana, Diablo and other side scrolling action RPGs when I was a kid, unfortunately not anymore.

So Bioware simply categorized it under the wrong category and now I understand why those who like it do. Cant compare apple and oranges.

[Volourn]

It's a RPG.

And, Zelda is an action adventure game.

DA2, like DA1, character success is based on character stats.

ME2, and BL are examples of action rpgs even thoguh they actually have better 'role-playing' than so called 'full rpgs' like BG, Gb games, and KOTOR.

[Galad22]

Steam calls it action rpg. Since I doubt steam throws those genre names on there without imput from the developers, I am fairly sure even bioware considers DA2 action/rpg. Which it is.

[Khayness]

RPG.

The combat still relies more on the character's stats and skills than the player imput to be an Action-RPG.

[xkg]

Character stats - ok well, pumping all points into 1 or 2 attributes / 6 available doesnt seems like RPG element to me - more like some lame excuse to call it like that.

DA2 is just a modern adventure game - not even action game. You want to play action game, go play Bloodrayne.

[Volourn]

"Steam calls it action rpg. Since I doubt steam throws those genre names on there without imput from the developers, I am fairly sure even bioware considers DA2 action/rpg. Which it is."

Please. Steam isn't the boss of anything. I've seen RPGs like BG, PST, and Fo called adventure games before on different 'official' sites.

BIO has pimped DA2 as a RPG.

Not that this matters - DA2 has more in common with RPGs like BG (even though BG is really crappy at the actual role-playing) than an action rpg like ME2 or BGDA.

People need to remember that you shoudln't be labeling games based on how good ro bad they are.

ES series sucks big time but theya re still 9really crappy) RPGs.


"Character stats - ok well, pumping all points into 1 or 2 attributes / 6 available doesnt seems like RPG element to me - more like some lame excuse to call it like that."

Sure, it is. Most RPGs do the exact same thing. In BG, each class only had 1-3 important stats. Heck, stats like intelligence, widsom, and charisma were basically 100% useless for fighters.

Modifié par Volourn, 26 avril 2011 - 03:32 .

[Night Prowler76]

Volourn wrote...

It's a RPG.

And, Zelda is an action adventure game.

DA2, like DA1, character success is based on character stats.

ME2, and BL are examples of action rpgs even thoguh they actually have better 'role-playing' than so called 'full rpgs' like BG, Gb games, and KOTOR.

BioWare marketed the game as an action-RPG, it says that in alot of their marketing, so no Volourn, it is an action RPG, not just an RPG.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

xkg wrote...

Character stats - ok well, pumping all points into 1 or 2 attributes / 6 available doesnt seems like RPG element to me - more like some lame excuse to call it like that.

DA2 is just a modern adventure game - not even action game. You want to play action game, go play Bloodrayne.

Putting the best scores into a character's relevant stats is about as old-school as it gets. 

Calling a modern game an "action" RPG as a perjorative is pretty silly.  Old-school RPG's could just as easily be called "tactical miniatures" RPG's.  There's nothing about Igo/Hugo combat and graph paper that define the genre.  D&D was the first RPG, but it's not the only possible approach.

[oldmansavage]

Its an action RPG.  It is what it is and i dunno why the alpha drone cares its not like its a bad word.

Modifié par oldmansavage, 26 avril 2011 - 04:14 .

[Teredan]

oldmansavage wrote...

Its an action RPG.  It is what it is and i dunno why the alpha drone cares its not like its a bad word.

it's rpg elitism

people get snarky if you put anything before their rpg, they think it's gonna defile it.
Hence you see things like "what's that J before my RPG, i don't see no feakin rpg here!"

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

oldmansavage wrote...

Its an action RPG.  It is what it is and i dunno why the alpha drone cares its not like its a bad word.

My point exactly.  Any RPG can be described with a prefix.  The idea that there's such a thing as "just an RPG" is mythical.  It can only be voiced by someone who believes that his preferences are the default and any variation lessens the essential "RPG-ness" of the game.

[Huntress]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

Volourn wrote...

It's a RPG.

And, Zelda is an action adventure game.

DA2, like DA1, character success is based on character stats.

ME2, and BL are examples of action rpgs even thoguh they actually have better 'role-playing' than so called 'full rpgs' like BG, Gb games, and KOTOR.

BioWare marketed the game as an action-RPG, it says that in alot of their marketing, so no Volourn, it is an action RPG, not just an RPG.

^Thats true. Thats where the separation from the masses started.

[Galad22]

Teredan wrote...

oldmansavage wrote...

Its an action RPG.  It is what it is and i dunno why the alpha drone cares its not like its a bad word.

it's rpg elitism

people get snarky if you put anything before their rpg, they think it's gonna defile it.
Hence you see things like "what's that J before my RPG, i don't see no feakin rpg here!"

It is not elitism exactly. To me rpg means that there is depth, and other things in it than combat.

Action rpg means that game is all about combat.

DA2 is sadly almost all about combat.

[Maverick827]

I didn't really see a difference between Origins and DA2 on the PC. I saw an enemy, I clicked on an enemy, I chose an ability targeted at that enemy, and then said ability was executed. Just because my character lunged/cartwheeled/flipped/grapevined/electric-slid/etc. to the target while doing so doesn't really strike me as different.

Modifié par Maverick827, 26 avril 2011 - 04:23 .

[randName]

It's more of an ARPG than a cRPG that's for sure - hardly any choices and almost everything in the game is built around the live action combat element, and even if you can pause it feels like a hindsight.

& While you can pick your mannerism and build a role in part, but then you have a similar option (albeit simpler) in saint's row that allows you to pick from three different VO sets, much like what you get in DA2. And in the end you can hardly build character since you never have to take any decisions, you just bob along the railroaded path to glory, much like most ARPGs and pure action games like GTA IV or Saint's row (that often offers more freedom in how you go about it).

And the D2 got as much tactics when it comes to combat, but does it better.

Not saying ARPGs are bad, or that DA2 is horrid - its a decent game I think, but wouldn't call it an cRPG.


EDIT. that said most cRPGs got action in it (save TB games), it's just a question if we should call it an ARPG or not based upon the amount of emphasis that is placed on the action part, and I don't like it when people use ARPG as an insult as there are several good role playing games based upon realtime action/combat.

Then DA:O was already leaning over so heavily into the action part that I was close to calling that a ARPG instead of soley a cRPG. (FONV for example I wouldn't call a ARPG since action is volentary and you can go through the game without fighting).

Modifié par randName, 26 avril 2011 - 04:37 .

[TJSolo]

Maverick827 wrote...

I didn't really see a difference between Origins and DA2 on the PC. I saw an enemy, I clicked on an enemy, I chose an ability targeted at that enemy, and then said ability was executed. Just because my character lunged/cartwheeled/flipped/grapevined/electric-slid/etc. to the target while doing so doesn't really strike me as different.

Well if I ignored the parts that make the combat different, then the combat would be the same.

[SoR82]

its a grpg anyone gonna guess go on it will be fun XD

[Scimal]

So Bioware simply categorized it under the wrong category and now
I understand why those who like it do. Cant compare apple and oranges.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha... Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha... ha ha ha ha ha!

You know what, you're totally right. It's not that people have different tastes about stories, characters, combat mechanics, and art design - it's that they put "Action" in front of it!

Totally right.

Why, just last week I thought Portal 2 was an Adventure-Puzzle game because it has a bunch of physics puzzles. Luckily for me, I LOVE Adventure-Puzzle games. Best Valve game in the last 3 years for me!

However, I just looked it up on Steam - and it's actually an Action-Adventure! No puzzles at all! Now I hate it!

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.... Man, I'm glad I got that figured out!

Now I'm going to go post a thread on the Steam forums about all the idiots who like Action-Adventure games because they're not Adventure-Puzzle games, excuse me.

[Teredan]

Galad22 wrote...
It is not elitism exactly. To me rpg means that there is depth, and other things in it than combat.

Action rpg means that game is all about combat.

DA2 is sadly almost all about combat.

Demon Souls/ME 1&2 and I'm going over the fence with this but I'd classify the Elder Scrolls also as action rpgs and have plenty of depth. Putting action before the rpg  does not exclude depth.

and about the elitism thing, don't take me to seriously there I was just poking fun at a certain group of people

[abaris]

Maverick827 wrote...

I didn't really see a difference between Origins and DA2 on the PC. I saw an enemy, I clicked on an enemy, I chose an ability targeted at that enemy, and then said ability was executed. Just because my character lunged/cartwheeled/flipped/grapevined/electric-slid/etc. to the target while doing so doesn't really strike me as different.

The difference being, you weren't jumped every step of the way. This time round the developers obviously thought, their audience would get bored if there was too little combat. Hence, action rules this baby a lot more than its predecessor.

[Galad22]

Teredan wrote...

Galad22 wrote...
It is not elitism exactly. To me rpg means that there is depth, and other things in it than combat.

Action rpg means that game is all about combat.

DA2 is sadly almost all about combat.

Demon Souls/ME 1&2 and I'm going over the fence with this but I'd classify the Elder Scrolls also as action rpgs and have plenty of depth. Putting action before the rpg  does not exclude depth.

and about the elitism thing, don't take me to seriously there I was just poking fun at a certain group of people

Depth I agree, but other things. Generally at least in games I consider rpgs have skills that don't have anything to do with combat. Say diplomacy. But of course that is just my definition of rpg.

[randName]

Teredan wrote...

Galad22 wrote...
It is not elitism exactly. To me rpg means that there is depth, and other things in it than combat.

Action rpg means that game is all about combat.

DA2 is sadly almost all about combat.

Demon Souls/ME 1&2 and I'm going over the fence with this but I'd classify the Elder Scrolls also as action rpgs and have plenty of depth. Putting action before the rpg  does not exclude depth.

and about the elitism thing, don't take me to seriously there I was just poking fun at a certain group of people

I read his comment about depth different, and and while this is just my interpretation of it I would claim that a cRPG contains depth in the sense that it's about more than one style of playing, in this case combat, or the emphasis isn't placed on combat and there are normally more than one way to solve a problem, esp more that one way that doesn't involve fighting.

So in FONV you can sneak by, you can talk yourself by, fight yourself through and so on - it's not just fighting, but this doesn't say that a combat heavy game lacks depth, it just doesn't present alternatives to fighting on a regular basis.

[Rawgrim]

Action game with dialogue.

[Maverick827]

TJSolo wrote...

Well if I ignored the parts that make the combat different, then the combat would be the same.

So the definition of an RPG comes down to solely animations?

[Teredan]

Galad22 wrote...

Depth I agree, but other things. Generally at least in games I consider rpgs have skills that don't have anything to do with combat. Say diplomacy. But of course that is just my definition of rpg.

Sure it's valid still I wouldn't put under the word depth I'd rather describe it as a D&D style rpg. The things you mention aren't that common today anymore in rpg's in general, which I think is kinda sad but that's another topic.