157 réponses à ce sujet

[Phaedon]

Ahglock wrote...
I can't think of many Bioware games where you are the character.  You are always taking control of another character.  Changing the first name isn;t much.  You are Hawk in DA2, you have the same background no matter what, and basically are the same guy historically speaking.  You change a bit once you take control though.  And they are defined by some as WRPG.  But maybe I am not understanding your point.  

Mass effect is also a TPS, so you take control in combat which is where the TPS elements are not the RPG elements.  That is why it is a hybrid, which is exactly what Bioware was going for, they wanted a shooter/RPG, they were not trying to make a pure RPG.  I wont comment on whether or not it is a good with its TPS elements since it is the only one I have played.  Its RPG elements were strong in some areas weak in others.  Not much in the way of character building but good diologue design for example.  

Overall as my 300 hours attest to it is a good game.  If you are looking for pure shooter or pure RPG you would probably be disapointed.  

While you don't take 100% control over the character, it's your character, your face, your name, and your decisions.

[lolwut666]

Ahglock wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

I like to think that BioWare emploee's have realized how stupid the fanbase is so they just ignore all the trolls and nay-sayers somplaining about the game and do things their own way.

Unfortunately, that's only partially true at best.

Dude, last interview basically said we pay attention to stupid fans.  People who preferred ME1 hope their brand of stupid is being heard this time instead of what got us ME2.  

"What got us ME2"?

I'm done talking with you now.

You're clearly some JRPG fanboy/stat freak or whatever.

ME2's system was perfectly functional.

I bet you don't even know *why* you want crap like inventory back.

You're campaigning to ruin the pace of the game - and maybe the whole gameplay - just so you can have your precious "RPG elements".

Get a life.

[Ashathor]

Could someone elighten me on what all these RPG/other gaming terms mean? Only one I got out of this page was I believe "Japanese role playing game." After that I didn't understand any of the other terms.

Modifié par Ashathor, 28 avril 2011 - 08:07 .

[Ahglock]

lolwut666 wrote...

Ahglock wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

I like to think that BioWare emploee's have realized how stupid the fanbase is so they just ignore all the trolls and nay-sayers somplaining about the game and do things their own way.

Unfortunately, that's only partially true at best.

Dude, last interview basically said we pay attention to stupid fans.  People who preferred ME1 hope their brand of stupid is being heard this time instead of what got us ME2.  

"What got us ME2"?

I'm done talking with you now.

You're clearly some JRPG fanboy/stat freak or whatever.

ME2's system was perfectly functional.

I bet you don't even know *why* you want crap like inventory back.

You're campaigning to ruin the pace of the game - and maybe the whole gameplay - just so you can have your precious "RPG elements".

Get a life.

How would you have liked that phrased?  I think I fairly clearly said both sides are being idiots about it.  I am sorry I can look at both sides of the issue instead of being a mindless drone.  

[Ahglock]

Ashathor wrote...

Could someone elighten me on what all these RPG/other gaming terms mean? Only one I got out of page for was I believe "Japanese role playing game." After that I didn't understand any of the other terms.

There isn't a hard coded rule for what RPG or RPG terms mean.  Which was sort of my original point, what makes an RPG to one person will have no bearing on what makes a RPG to another person.  Certain features are or were common in RPGs depending on the time frame, some people tie those specifc features to what makes a RPG, others keep it more to general concepts like controlling a character.  


Edit to add.

My example for what I thought was core to a pure CRPG was character's controllig the fate of actions over players. I'll use D&D for an example.  Lets say I am playing a 5th level fighter with a 18/00 strength and I have a +1 long sword and IU'm specialized in its use.

Against a medium foe with a AC of -2 I would need to roll a 13 on a d20 to hit them  I am not deciding to it him based on player skill so the detail that I might fence in my persoanl life has no bearing.  All that matters is the character I am playing has a effective Thac0 of 11 so I hit a -2 with a 13.  

Now in FPS aiming and TPS aiming mechanics people were not satisifed when they lined up the perfect shot or hit and yet still missed.  Like in morrowind or ME1, because they controlled the aiming the character based aiming no longer worked.  And so they started to create hybrid mechanics for these games.  

Modifié par Ahglock, 28 avril 2011 - 08:15 .

[Rurik_Niall]

Ashathor wrote...

Could someone elighten me on what all these RPG/other gaming terms mean? Only one I got out of this page was I believe "Japanese role playing game." After that I didn't understand any of the other terms.

RPG - Role Playing Game

JRPG - Japanese Role Playing Game, generally a misnomer as they rarely include any actual role playing, Japanese Menu Based Strategy Game is a more apt description.

WRPG - Western Role Playing Game, also a misnomer as games like Diablo often get dumped into this category despite having no role playing.

CRPG - Computer Role Playing Game.

[Ahglock]

Rurik_Niall wrote...

Ashathor wrote...

Could someone elighten me on what all these RPG/other gaming terms mean? Only one I got out of this page was I believe "Japanese role playing game." After that I didn't understand any of the other terms.

RPG - Role Playing Game

JRPG - Japanese Role Playing Game, generally a misnomer as they rarely include any actual role playing, Japanese Menu Based Strategy Game is a more apt description.

WRPG - Western Role Playing Game, also a misnomer as games like Diablo often get dumped into this category despite having no role playing.

CRPG - Computer Role Playing Game.

Damn I think I missunderstood his quesiton.  

[fyckeg]

I don't know what the eff you guys are talking about it. All I want is a less linear game (ME1), helmet toggle (ME1), for the love of GOD no "press B to end mission" BS!!! That and the "Mission Complete" screen were some of the worst thing in ME2.

That is the main reason why I was so disappointed in ME2. ME1 was immersion.

Take Feros for example. You exited the Normandy, found the colonist, gathered information, did some side quests, made your way to the facility, did what you had to do, made your way back to the colonists, boarded the Normandy... REAL!

ME2 for example. Take recruiting Mordin mission: Landed on Omega, appeared on Omega, Spoke to Aria, Spoke to Turian guard, appeared somewhere on Omega, Found Mordin, did what you had to do, Spoke to Mordin, "Press B to end mission", "Mission Completed" screen, appeared on Normandy... CRAP!

[The Spamming Troll]

whas the difference between RPG and CRPG then?

[Ahglock]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

whas the difference between RPG and CRPG then?

The computer part of the C.  And it is a big difference IMO.  Not having a phsyical DM/GM changes it dramatically.  Limited scope in how you can solve problems, talk to people etc.  It also adds in graphics which depending on the dispaly will change things.  For example character stat based outcomes works fine in games like balders gate where you have a God view of the layout., click on a guy and tell them to do something. It does not work as well, when you change the view to TPS or FPS mode.  You can still do it, and some games do, but a lot of people who aren't into the stat side of things don't like lining up a perfect head shot to miss because the cimputer rolled a 1.  It removes the reason to aim, so aiming just sholdn't be in the game.  Go with a GTA style lock on system in a TP viewpoint if you want that IMO.  Once you add the aiming you need to go with a hybrid mechanic I think.  

[Kabanya101]

fyckeg wrote...

I don't know what the eff you guys are talking about it. All I want is a less linear game (ME1), helmet toggle (ME1), for the love of GOD no "press B to end mission" BS!!! That and the "Mission Complete" screen were some of the worst thing in ME2.

That is the main reason why I was so disappointed in ME2. ME1 was immersion.

Take Feros for example. You exited the Normandy, found the colonist, gathered information, did some side quests, made your way to the facility, did what you had to do, made your way back to the colonists, boarded the Normandy... REAL!

ME2 for example. Take recruiting Mordin mission: Landed on Omega, appeared on Omega, Spoke to Aria, Spoke to Turian guard, appeared somewhere on Omega, Found Mordin, did what you had to do, Spoke to Mordin, "Press B to end mission", "Mission Completed" screen, appeared on Normandy... CRAP!

I agree with all those points, those are definitely needed to make the game an RPG again, like in ME1. Other things that need to be done are:

1) Bring back the inventory system, but limit it. It offers the customization as an RPG, but limit it by not making 30 different suites and guns for everything, and for god sakes stack items
Most of the people that hate the inventory system were either because items didn't stack, and the love games that they don't have to think about and could care less about the RPG aspect of the game

2) class trees need to be expanded. First they need more passives, more powers, or a combination of both, such as Combat Armor or Fitness in ME1; power and passive bonus
Powers were usless in ME2, one because they either didn't work on the enemy because of the protection, or two the universal cool down prevented from using more than one power

3) Make things different. All the upgrades made every playthrough for ME2 the same, even on different difficulties. At least in ME1, the playthroughs would be different, at least the first time, because of armors, protection, health.

[Kabanya101]

fyckeg wrote...

I don't know what the eff you guys are talking about it. All I want is a less linear game (ME1), helmet toggle (ME1), for the love of GOD no "press B to end mission" BS!!! That and the "Mission Complete" screen were some of the worst thing in ME2.

That is the main reason why I was so disappointed in ME2. ME1 was immersion.

Take Feros for example. You exited the Normandy, found the colonist, gathered information, did some side quests, made your way to the facility, did what you had to do, made your way back to the colonists, boarded the Normandy... REAL!

ME2 for example. Take recruiting Mordin mission: Landed on Omega, appeared on Omega, Spoke to Aria, Spoke to Turian guard, appeared somewhere on Omega, Found Mordin, did what you had to do, Spoke to Mordin, "Press B to end mission", "Mission Completed" screen, appeared on Normandy... CRAP!

I agree with all those points, those are definitely needed to make the game an RPG again, like in ME1. Other things that need to be done are:

1) Bring back the inventory system, but limit it. It offers the customization as an RPG, but limit it by not making 30 different suites and guns for everything, and for god sakes stack items
Most of the people that hate the inventory system were either because items didn't stack, and the love games that they don't have to think about and could care less about the RPG aspect of the game

2) class trees need to be expanded. First they need more passives, more powers, or a combination of both, such as Combat Armor or Fitness in ME1; power and passive bonus
Powers were usless in ME2, one because they either didn't work on the enemy because of the protection, or two the universal cool down prevented from using more than one power

3) Make things different. All the upgrades made every playthrough for ME2 the same, even on different difficulties. At least in ME1, the playthroughs would be different, at least the first time, because of armors, protection, health.

[Rurik_Niall]

fyckeg wrote...

I don't know what the eff you guys are talking about it. All I want is a less linear game (ME1), helmet toggle (ME1), for the love of GOD no "press B to end mission" BS!!! That and the "Mission Complete" screen were some of the worst thing in ME2.

That is the main reason why I was so disappointed in ME2. ME1 was immersion.

Take Feros for example. You exited the Normandy, found the colonist, gathered information, did some side quests, made your way to the facility, did what you had to do, made your way back to the colonists, boarded the Normandy... REAL!

ME2 for example. Take recruiting Mordin mission: Landed on Omega, appeared on Omega, Spoke to Aria, Spoke to Turian guard, appeared somewhere on Omega, Found Mordin, did what you had to do, Spoke to Mordin, "Press B to end mission", "Mission Completed" screen, appeared on Normandy... CRAP!

And what's so wrong with that? Jogging back to the Normandy doesn't really add anything to the experience. If you're watching a movie do you really need to see the main character having an uneventful drive to the office? Ooh, look, he changed the radio station and is humming along to Bad Reputation, exciting! No wait, the other thing, tedious.

[fyckeg]

Rurik_Niall wrote...

fyckeg wrote...

I don't know what the eff you guys are talking about it. All I want is a less linear game (ME1), helmet toggle (ME1), for the love of GOD no "press B to end mission" BS!!! That and the "Mission Complete" screen were some of the worst thing in ME2.

That is the main reason why I was so disappointed in ME2. ME1 was immersion.

Take Feros for example. You exited the Normandy, found the colonist, gathered information, did some side quests, made your way to the facility, did what you had to do, made your way back to the colonists, boarded the Normandy... REAL!

ME2 for example. Take recruiting Mordin mission: Landed on Omega, appeared on Omega, Spoke to Aria, Spoke to Turian guard, appeared somewhere on Omega, Found Mordin, did what you had to do, Spoke to Mordin, "Press B to end mission", "Mission Completed" screen, appeared on Normandy... CRAP!

And what's so wrong with that? Jogging back to the Normandy doesn't really add anything to the experience. If you're watching a movie do you really need to see the main character having an uneventful drive to the office? Ooh, look, he changed the radio station and is humming along to Bad Reputation, exciting! No wait, the other thing, tedious.

There's nothing "wrong" with it I guess. 
It's just that there's a huge difference in gameplay between the two games. At
its core, ME2 is basically Gears of War with dialogue. And the problem with
that is we already have so many shooters out there. ME1 was incredibly
immersive and unique. Despite its technical issues, I truly believe it was a
masterpiece.

I understand everyone has their own preference between the two games. And I understand
I can't do anything about that. All I'm saying is that I prefer the original ME
in every way except for the graphical upgrade.

Modifié par fyckeg, 28 avril 2011 - 09:05 .

[Rurik_Niall]

And in certain cases I'd agree, but the ability to just return to the Normandy automatically simply isn't one of them. If something actually happens on the trip back to the Normandy that's one thing, but simply running from Mordin's clinic to the Normandy with no dialogue, no confrontation, just running from point A to point B doesn't need to be shown. This is a basic rule of pacing, the audience doesn't need to see every last detail of the character's life, they don't need to see Shepard wake up every morning, use the bathroom, take a shower, get dressed, head down to the mess hall for breakfast and spend five minutes trying to figure out why his breakfast is moving, etc.

[Ahglock]

Rurik_Niall wrote...

And in certain cases I'd agree, but the ability to just return to the Normandy automatically simply isn't one of them. If something actually happens on the trip back to the Normandy that's one thing, but simply running from Mordin's clinic to the Normandy with no dialogue, no confrontation, just running from point A to point B doesn't need to be shown. This is a basic rule of pacing, the audience doesn't need to see every last detail of the character's life, they don't need to see Shepard wake up every morning, use the bathroom, take a shower, get dressed, head down to the mess hall for breakfast and spend five minutes trying to figure out why his breakfast is moving, etc.

I think poor level design exagerated this though.  Take mordin's clinic.  you are running through the crap area of town in a giant space station city thing.  Where are the cars, the traffic, the shops the things to see why can't you call a taxi to you once the mission is over.  Instead it is all foot traffic hallways where you get the 2 bad options of running back through no where or mission end screen.  If the levels felt more integrated into the universe that walk back might be enjoyable, and you'd also have a fast transit option avaialable somewhere.  

Even enemy planets after you killed the bad guys calling a shuttle and having it pick you up is more immersive than a poof you have a weird loading screen with Tim chilling in front of a star. 

Not saying ME2 did it in a horrible way, but I think there are areas where it could be improved.  Another thing about these areas why can;t you go back?  I mean the plague is gone, why can;t I go back into that area and talk to guy at the clinic or something?  The opened just for the mission thing creates a weird feel to the universe IMO where things are only there to be missions instead of the modrin clinic thing being a neighborhood you were traveling through.  

[fyckeg]

Rurik_Niall wrote...

And in certain cases I'd agree, but the ability to just return to the Normandy automatically simply isn't one of them. If something actually happens on the trip back to the Normandy that's one thing, but simply running from Mordin's clinic to the Normandy with no dialogue, no confrontation, just running from point A to point B doesn't need to be shown. This is a basic rule of pacing, the audience doesn't need to see every last detail of the character's life, they don't need to see Shepard wake up every morning, use the bathroom, take a shower, get dressed, head down to the mess hall for breakfast and spend five minutes trying to figure out why his breakfast is moving, etc.

Totally agree. But again, if you take feros, the distance between the normandy and the colonist was minimal (maybe less then a 30 seconds away). And the Mako ride from the colonist to the facility wasn't just a joy ride since you were blowing up geth on the way. And again, on the way back, the distance isn't that long. But it adds so much the believability of the ME universe.

Like in ME1 when you rescued Liara. You actually made your way to
her. Then once you freed her, you all took the big elevator back up,
killed some fools, and that was the end of it. No "Press B" and no "Mission Complete", and no backtracking.

What I meant was that I wish ME2's (and ME3 for that matter) missons were structured more like ME1. Trust me, I don't want to see shepard drop a deuce either.

Modifié par fyckeg, 28 avril 2011 - 09:35 .

[Rurik_Niall]

Ahglock wrote...

I think poor level design exagerated this
though.  Take mordin's clinic.  you are running through the crap area
of town in a giant space station city thing.  Where are the cars, the
traffic, the shops the things to see why can't you call a taxi to you
once the mission is over.  Instead it is all foot traffic hallways where
you get the 2 bad options of running back through no where or mission
end screen.  If the levels felt more integrated into the universe that
walk back might be enjoyable, and you'd also have a fast transit option
avaialable somewhere.  

Even enemy planets after you killed the
bad guys calling a shuttle and having it pick you up is more immersive
than a poof you have a weird loading screen with Tim chilling in front
of a star. 

Not saying ME2 did it in a horrible way, but I think
there are areas where it could be improved.  Another thing about these
areas why can;t you go back?  I mean the plague is gone, why can;t I go
back into that area and talk to guy at the clinic or something?  The
opened just for the mission thing creates a weird feel to the universe
IMO where things are only there to be missions instead of the modrin
clinic thing being a neighborhood you were traveling through.  

True enough, but then why would you want to return anyway? Once the mission is done there's no reason to go back, you've got a mission to do and you're not likely to find a vital weapon to defeat the Collectors in a slum you already visited.

Modifié par Rurik_Niall, 28 avril 2011 - 09:38 .

[Ahglock]

Rurik_Niall wrote...

True enough, but then why would you want to return anyway? Once the mission is done there's no reason to go back, you've got a mission to do and you're not likely to find a vital weapon to defeat the Collectors in a slum you already visited.

I am sure that is the reasoning, but why do I pick up packages for Ish other than out of the morbid curiosity to see what happens to him in ME3.  There are enough pointelss side quests that leaving area open hopefully with conitnuing gang violence in some areas seems fitting IMO.  

Modifié par Ahglock, 28 avril 2011 - 09:43 .

[The Spamming Troll]

i dont know about this rurik guy but i loved running to and from the normandy while doing quests.

i want more "decontamination in progress" and more elevator rides rather then hit B to end mission.

[fyckeg]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

i dont know about this rurik guy but i loved running to and from the normandy while doing quests.

i want more "decontamination in progress" and more elevator rides rather then hit B to end mission.

This guy gets it!!!!!

[Rurik_Niall]

Now I'm all for going back to the cleverly disguised loading screens, but I still see no point to making players trek back to the Normandy after wrapping up a mission unless something is actually going to happen on the way, that's just pointless padding that contributes nothing to the story or the gameplay.

[The Spamming Troll]

it obviously contributed something tho.

i wish a game could be developed that never needed "fast travel" i played ME1 a million times and not once did i not want to run around the citadel scanning collectors and riding elevators. i loved that aspect of ME2. loved it!

i hate "hit B to end mission" anything is better then that. even finding a fast travel that takes to directly to the normandys front door would be better.

[Savber100]

So.... after reading all that stuff, I'm pulling this back on topic from what makes a RPG to what can make ME3 a better RPG.

Spamming Troll, how would YOU change ME3 into becoming the best culmination of both games?
I know you already mentioned points here and there but I'm curious what you ultimately believe should be the next step for the ME franchise.

Basically if Casey Hudson was currently reading this thread for improvements, what will you suggest that he have the team do?

We already got the idea about having a robust gun mod system like MGS4

More armor customization

Bring back the elevators and the vehicle exploration (I bet the developers are shooting their heads off after all that complaint about how the Mako was horrible etc etc) But I agree... find a way to keep immersion while also optimizing the load times.

Bring back inventory (I find this unlikely)


Anything else?

Modifié par Savber100, 29 avril 2011 - 03:39 .

[The Spamming Troll]

revamp enemy protections. my god i hate enemy protections.

i cant even write anything more because it makes me feel stupid talking about enemy protections.