243 réponses à ce sujet

[AkiKishi]

Action RPGs and cooldowns do not really mix. Action combat can be very immersive once you get the controls down. Cooldowns remove that. The problem with DA2 as I saw it, it's not action enough and it's not strategy enough. It fails at both. The game needs to pick an identity , this is another thing you see through DA2 it's never realy sure what it wants to be. It's a missmatch of parts or "Hawkes Mom" as I like to call it.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 27 avril 2011 - 11:20 .

[FedericoV]

It's somewhere in between the action-rpg and rpg genre, just like DA:O.

Only, nearer to the action side.

[Volourn]

"Eh, DA2 has so little to offer in terms of actual player choice, both in terms of character building and personality, I have trouble even thinking of it as an RPG."

So, POR1, the rest of the Gb games, and most 'classic' RPGs arenot RPGs? LMAO

[Mecher3k]

FedericoV wrote...

It's somewhere in between the action-rpg and rpg genre, just like DA:O.

Only, nearer to the action side.

So nearer to action that it is a action rpg!

[Guldor]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Action RPGs and cooldowns do not really mix. Action combat can be very immersive once you get the controls down. Cooldowns remove that. The problem with DA2 as I saw it, it's not action enough and it's not strategy enough. It fails at both. The game needs to pick an identity , this is another thing you see through DA2 it's never realy sure what it wants to be. It's a missmatch of parts or "Hawkes Mom" as I like to call it.

Yes. It has the turn-based of a "classic" rpg (with the pause button and the task assignements) yet you must hack and slash. Its Baldur' gate meets Diablo but in 2011.

[Volourn]

DA series is not turn based. Not even close.

[AlanC9]

Volourn wrote...

"Eh, DA2 has so little to offer in terms of actual player choice, both in terms of character building and personality, I have trouble even thinking of it as an RPG."

So, POR1, the rest of the Gb games, and most 'classic' RPGs arenot RPGs? LMAO

I'd add Planescape to that. Were there any meaningful choices in that game?

[Haexpane]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Action RPGs and cooldowns do not really mix. Action combat can be very immersive once you get the controls down. Cooldowns remove that. The problem with DA2 as I saw it, it's not action enough and it's not strategy enough. It fails at both. The game needs to pick an identity , this is another thing you see through DA2 it's never realy sure what it wants to be. It's a missmatch of parts or "Hawkes Mom" as I like to call it.

This. It's the same old "dice rolls behind the scenes" strategy on top engine.  Which I like
EXCEPT for the fact that they ruined it by turning it to 11 and having lame respawning ninjas.

It's most definitely NOT an "action " RPG like diablo.  It has gore and blood and speed, but you press a button and a DICE ROLL happens before the "Awesome" blood everywhere.

I vastly prefer the Dice Roll behind the scenes games like KOTOR and Mass Effect 1.

But what they did here was give a hooker's corpse meth and then ask it to dance.

[Haexpane]

Volourn wrote...

Yeah, but that wasn't directed at you but the people who claim that role-playing has nothing to do with combat when classic RPGs were nothing *but* combat. Heck, the 'mother of all rpgs' D&D started out as a table top war game.

A game can have little to no story or just a plain awful story andf still be a rpg.

Yes it drives me BANANAS that people insist that the stupid grade C Lifetime Movie Network story is what makes a game an RPG.  That is silly!

What makes a VIDEO GAME an RPG has nothing to do with the story.

Otherwise, DOnkey Kong could be an RPG since it has a "story".

[Duchess of Dumb Fries]

TJSolo wrote...

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.

Yes. For the most part, it's almost even "turn-based in real time" like Kotor. Very few action rpgs let you assume direct control of party members as well. The player's action's has very little input during combat. For example, magic and arrows are homing missles and do not recognise barriers:? "Stats" determine whether you and the arrow will be friends, there is no way to avoid a "vanishing rogue"'s attack, etc(I have yet to try miasmic flasking the area) Some parts you can call action rpg elements- mostly area of effect attacks, but that' mostly because that is the only way to do it and Origins was just as much like that (in fact,  although arrows still chase people, you could at least take cover from it.) I do like how they changed most of the Ogre's attacks to AOE though, that gave it quite an action feel.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

What is an RPG?

Lol.

[Romantiq]

More like pointless action RPG

[xkg]

mrcrusty wrote...

What is an RPG?

Lol.

RPG 

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

xkg wrote...

mrcrusty wrote...

What is an RPG?

Lol.

RPG 

Pfft.

It's obvious then that Dragon Age 2 is not an RPG.

[MassEffect762]

Whatever it is it falls short.

[AlanC9]

Jeez, Haexpane ... since when did you go in for thread necromancy?

[Realmzmaster]

Ah! We are back to this old debate. Someone give me a definitive definition of CRPG. I have asked this question before and everyone has differing opinions.
Does it have to be based on the AD&D 2.0, 3.0 or 3.5 ruleset to be classified as an CRPG? Or can it be based on Runequest, Tunnels & Trolls (which did have it own video game back in 1990 . Any one remember Crusaders of Kkazan by New World Computing), GURPS or the Fantasy Trip.
BG1 was based on the D & D 2.0 ruleset. BG1 is also called an action-CRPG.
Is the Temple of Elemental Evil which used the AD&D 3.5 ruleset and has turn-based tactical combat more of a CRPG than BG1 or BG2?
What about Wizardry or the Ultimas are they CRPGs? What about Might and Magic or the Bards Tale all heavy on the combat?
All the early CRPGs were heavy on the combat. In fact in the Bards Tale you could barely walk three steps without being attacked.
Does being an CRPG mean eliminating the ability to save anywhere, but an inn?
Someone please enlighten me on the definition of CRPG. I played many games that seem to fit the genre, but others opinions here seem to say otherwise.
Hello AlanC9! Good to read your posts again!

[Haexpane]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Ah! We are back to this old debate. Someone give me a definitive definition of CRPG. I have asked this question before and everyone has differing opinions.
Does it have to be based on the AD&D 2.0, 3.0 or 3.5 ruleset to be classified as an CRPG? Or can it be based on Runequest, Tunnels & Trolls (which did have it own video game back in 1990 . Any one remember Crusaders of Kkazan by New World Computing), GURPS or the Fantasy Trip.
BG1 was based on the D & D 2.0 ruleset. BG1 is also called an action-CRPG.
Is the Temple of Elemental Evil which used the AD&D 3.5 ruleset and has turn-based tactical combat more of a CRPG than BG1 or BG2?
What about Wizardry or the Ultimas are they CRPGs? What about Might and Magic or the Bards Tale all heavy on the combat?
All the early CRPGs were heavy on the combat. In fact in the Bards Tale you could barely walk three steps without being attacked.
Does being an CRPG mean eliminating the ability to save anywhere, but an inn?
Someone please enlighten me on the definition of CRPG. I played many games that seem to fit the genre, but others opinions here seem to say otherwise.
Hello AlanC9! Good to read your posts again!

Sorry AlanC9, I just post on threads that I find from my user profile.  I don't do a good job at keeping up on the "hot topic" floater threads.

Definition of a "CRPG" = PC gaming elist played the game, and liked it, and it was Pre Windows Vista = "classic CRPG"

Like all of these "definitions" what they really are = buckets we can dump games in to help our brain categorize them.

Clearly DA2 is the same category as DAO,  Real Time With Pause / western RPG.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Bleh, RPGs can encompass such a large spectrum of games that it's better just to keep the definition broad and argue within sub genres.

RPGs are games that you can play a role in which your character's skills play a significant role as opposed to other kinds of games which focus on player skill.

It's like Christianity. The defining aspect of Christianity is the belief in Jesus Christ and all that entails, but beyond that there are Churches and denominations upon Churches and denominations all of which may have vastly differing beliefs from each other on various issues.

RPG is an umbrella term, not a specific one.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 03 mai 2011 - 02:22 .

[wowpwnslol]

It's a console action rpg.

[KilrB]

It's an anti-rpg.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Ah! We are back to this old debate. Someone give me a definitive definition of CRPG. I have asked this question before and everyone has differing opinions.
Does it have to be based on the AD&D 2.0, 3.0 or 3.5 ruleset to be classified as an CRPG? Or can it be based on Runequest, Tunnels & Trolls (which did have it own video game back in 1990 . Any one remember Crusaders of Kkazan by New World Computing), GURPS or the Fantasy Trip.
BG1 was based on the D & D 2.0 ruleset. BG1 is also called an action-CRPG.
Is the Temple of Elemental Evil which used the AD&D 3.5 ruleset and has turn-based tactical combat more of a CRPG than BG1 or BG2?
What about Wizardry or the Ultimas are they CRPGs? What about Might and Magic or the Bards Tale all heavy on the combat?
All the early CRPGs were heavy on the combat. In fact in the Bards Tale you could barely walk three steps without being attacked.
Does being an CRPG mean eliminating the ability to save anywhere, but an inn?
Someone please enlighten me on the definition of CRPG. I played many games that seem to fit the genre, but others opinions here seem to say otherwise.
Hello AlanC9! Good to read your posts again!

Let me play the advocate of the devil...

Let's look at a video of a modern game: Drakensang: The River of Time. Is that a CRPG because it is based on a P&P rule set and has automated turn based combat or is it an action RPG with complex rules and slow combat? Isn't it very similar to DA2? Doesn't DA2 differ only in having less complex rules (or maybe just well hidden) and more responsive combat?

[Anathemic]

Thread necro much?

Agh, I'll say it again like I did before. DA2 does NOT deserve the title of Action RPG, it's a disgrace to the genre.

[AlanC9]

Haexpane wrote...

Sorry AlanC9, I just post on threads that I find from my user profile.  I don't do a good job at keeping up on the "hot topic" floater threads.

Don't sweat it. If you didn't rez this thread someone would just start another one in a day or two. It's one of those topics we just can't drop.

Good to see you too, Realmzmaster. Maybe we should PM some more of the usual suspects. Haven't seen anything from Sylvius this past week or so, but Volourn's been kicking around lately.

[Realmzmaster]

IMHO DA 2 is not a disgrace to the action-rpg genre. I can think of a few games that can carry that title extremely well. I will name only one: Silverfall by Monte Cristo inflicted upon the world by Atari. Compare to Silverfall DA 2 is a breath of fresh air.
I picked Silverfall up in the bargain bin for $7.50. I wanted my money back. I liked DA 2 enough that I completed five entire playthroughs. I have not got around to playing the mage a second time. But YMMV..