TornadoADV wrote...
No stats and loot? I love how they think they can dictate what does and doesn't make an RPG.
Guest_Arcian_*
I love how you think you can dictate what does and doesn't make an RPG.TornadoADV wrote...
No stats and loot? I love how they think they can dictate what does and doesn't make an RPG. Other then that, everything looks awesome, specially Kaidan.
Varen Spectre wrote...
This is by far my favorite part of the text. Like I already said in "Environmental improvements thread", more and more games are going to have really impressive scripts with spectacular effects influencing and changing the environments. If Mass Effect 3 wants to keep up, it should try to follow the examples set by Uncharted 3 or Crisis 2."I think Lair of the Shadow Broker is a good look at how we design levels now" says Hudson ... "It's all about sudden shifts in the action. There's a section on Earth where you're running a narrow walkway and there's a war going on all around you and a ship is in the distance. Suddenly its nuclear core blows up and its suchs a shockwave that it knocks you off the walkway and you end up sliding down the glass face of a knocked over high-rise and then you kind of roll and catch yourself and all that happens in a moment of gameplay. You have control thoughout and that's when you'll realise annything could happen at any time"
The crashes of spaceships, the floors that crumble,... and not to mention superb earthquake in Battlefield 3. These modern games, oh my god.
hawat333 wrote...
Eight is a much more ideal number as you can develop deeper characters. Comparing ME1 to ME2, in the former we've had some interesting characters, in the latter we've had some interesting tropes.
mrsph wrote...
ExtremeOne wrote...
Oh don't worry at least Star Wars and its characters are iconic unlike Mass Effect which will never be on the same level as Star Wars. Oh My 2 Shepard's are hardcore pro Cerberus and has no interest in being a alliance b*tch at all
So you are turning down help from much a bigger resource than Cerberus that has shown to be more stable and trustworthy than Cerberus? Aren't renegades supposed to be a results no matter what kind of person?
Gatt9 wrote...
RPG! (not the weapon)
"We've taken a lot of feedback from the Mass Effect community," says Hudson. "more than anything, people want us to deepen the RPG aspect of the experience. Now, that isn't necessarily something traditional; about stats and loot; we see it as being more about exploration and making a good character-driven story with intelligent decision-making in how you progress."
"I think specifically we wanted to do more with the sense of progression. We had that sense in ME2, but only in a few areasregarding your armour choices, your weapon choices and the things you find. That activity chain was too simple and it didn't allow you to make choices that could customise your experience. You could choose different weapons and stuff like that but you couldn't invest in the weapons like you can in ME3. You can see how modifications change different attributes, and start making choices about your value and which ones you would rather sell and which ones you think are rare. That whole activity coain was a button we weren't really pushing in ME2 and something we're trying to hit throughout ME3"
So basically, they spent an enourmous amount of time on the Shooter aspects, and then, apparently were unable to find anyone left at Bioware who knows what an RPG is?
Because everyone knows it's an RPG if you take Gears of War's gameplay, and toss in a few of Dead Rising's workbenches. Who needs stats, loot, or a defined character? Those thing's aren't RPGs, Dead Rising and GoW are!
At least they managed to avoid telling us about the awesome button.
JeffZero wrote...
gorrillasnake wrote...
this thread was used on kotaku
http://kotaku.com/58...ht-want-to-hear
Right on. I love me some Kotaku.
Modifié par Apollo Starflare, 12 mai 2011 - 05:28 .
"There's a section on Earth where you're running a narrow walkway and there's a war going on all around you and a ship is in the distance. Suddenly its nuclear core blows up and its suchs a shockwave that it knocks you off the walkway and you end up sliding down the glass face of a knocked over high-rise and then you kind of roll and catch yourself and all that happens in a moment of game play. You have control throughout and that's when you'll realize anything could happen at any time"
Modifié par Vertigo_1, 12 mai 2011 - 10:52 .
And you can?
I think what makes an RPG are the story, characters, dialogue and character customization. I couldn't care less about prying stuff off of dead enemies or raising my Wisdom and Dexterity (unless they have an effect outside of combat...). Of course, these things are much nicer than straight-up shooter gameplay, but they're not essential to my enjoyment of an RPG.
--------
I love how you think you can dictate what does and doesn't make an RPG.
Modifié par TornadoADV, 12 mai 2011 - 06:28 .
Guest_Arcian_*
Oh god, I laughed way, way harder than I should have.TornadoADV wrote...
Edit : Hell, Starcraft 2 was more of an RPG then Mass Effect 2 was, and that's just plain sad. Seeing how Starcraft 2 is classified as a RTS and all.
Arcian wrote...
Oh god, I laughed way, way harder than I should have.TornadoADV wrote...
Edit : Hell, Starcraft 2 was more of an RPG then Mass Effect 2 was, and that's just plain sad. Seeing how Starcraft 2 is classified as a RTS and all.
But it's a sad state when the Singleplayer of Starcraft 2 has more in common with an RPG then Mass Effect 2, a game that actually claims to be one.
Modifié par TornadoADV, 12 mai 2011 - 07:49 .
JeffZero wrote...
"RPG" means different things to different people. For me, ME2 is more of an RPG than Starcraft 2 because there's much more of a feeling that I'm associating myself with my character and his/her interactions with their surroundings feels like a role being played.
Oh, and Arcian, a troll? Naw.
TornadoADV wrote...
JeffZero wrote...
"RPG" means different things to different people. For me, ME2 is more of an RPG than Starcraft 2 because there's much more of a feeling that I'm associating myself with my character and his/her interactions with their surroundings feels like a role being played.
Oh, and Arcian, a troll? Naw.
You do exactly the same thing as Jim Raynor in Starcraft 2. I get to play the role of a down on his luck rebel leader who goes on to save the sector from the Zerg. And 90% of the story isn't recruitment/loyalty missions.
SalsaDMA wrote...
You do realize that Hacket outtrigt tries to manipulate you at various points, right?
And as for your 'stable and trustworthy'.... Who exactly was it that told you to go suck a lollipop when you approached them in ME2? And who is it that wants to put you on trial for what happened in Arrival?
Don't kid yourself and ignore that alliance is just as 'backstabbing' as Cerberus is. Neither organization is roses and dandelions.
1136342t54 wrote...
SalsaDMA wrote...
You do realize that Hacket outtrigt tries to manipulate you at various points, right?
And as for your 'stable and trustworthy'.... Who exactly was it that told you to go suck a lollipop when you approached them in ME2? And who is it that wants to put you on trial for what happened in Arrival?
Don't kid yourself and ignore that alliance is just as 'backstabbing' as Cerberus is. Neither organization is roses and dandelions.
Actually no the Alliance isn't as bad as Cerberus a terrorist organization that is responsible for the deaths of many innocent people involving torture, experimentation, Thresher Maw ambushes, Rachni, Thorian Creepers and Husks.
The Alliance sure manipulated Shepard because Shepard is technically still a part of the Alliance Military as well as a Citadel Spectre. Hackett sent you on missions that you saved lives and you didn't really have to do them at all. There was one time Hackett tricked Shepard and that was when he wanted a dangerous warlord killed.
Cerberus is actively trying to kill Shepard while the Council wants to put Shepard on Trial for Destroying one of the most valuable technological creations in the Galaxy and wiping out an entire system full of resources because a race of sentient Machines/Organics want to destroy all life in the galaxy and turn humans in to smoothies. I'm sure Shepard's story is very believable.
JeffZero wrote...
Maybe I just didn't feel half as much of a connection to Raynor. And I'm not just talking as someone who doesn't get that plenty of RPGs feature set-in-stone protagonists, because I was raised on a healthy diet of both WRPGs and linear-but-well-written JRPGs from the 1990s.
Starcraft 2 didn't feel like an RPG to me in the least because not only was its gameplay RTS, as you said, but its story didn't have the kind of narrative-interactive strength that I associate with the term "RPG". I... didn't feel it.
And 90% of ME2's story being recruitment/loyalty missions works for me. It's the midway point in a trilogy and I love to get to know the universes of a trilogy's story at the midway point. For those who can't stand the fact that this is what they got to hold them over for another two years until ME3, then I'm truly sorry. It didn't bother me one bit.
Bad King wrote...
May I remind you that Cerberus was a part of the Alliance for years prior to ME1 and many of their most unethical and ruthless activities were conducted while they were under the wing of the Alliance.
Hatikvah07 wrote...
Did the every really establish the nature of Cerberus? In ME1 they were simply a rogue Alliance intelligence agency, similar to Section 31 in Star Trek or the NSA in pretty much everything, but in ME2 they're an independently funded paramilitary group, and the Alliance connection is never brought up or mentioned.
Retour en haut
