556 réponses à ce sujet

[VoidCabbage]

BeefoTheBold wrote...

Schneidend wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

1. OMG the Collectors are (spoiler)
2. Build a kick butt team
3. Suicide mission

1. OMG the reapers are coming
2. Find beacons
3. Kill Saren

See what I did thar?

Yes, you unsuccessfully tried to do the same sort of thing that I did.

I say unsuccessfully because everything we know about the ME universe we learned in ME1.

1. Where's the Mass Relays come from? What was their purpose? Who created them?
2. What happened to the Protheans?
3. What's the Conduit?
4. What is Indoctrination?
5. What's the Krogan War?
6. Where's the Citadel Council come from?
7. How did humanity find their way onto the galactic stage?
8. Why'd Saren turn bad?
9. Who are the Quarians, Turians, Batarians, Rachni, etc.
10. What caused the Rachni War?
11. What's the purpose of the Presidium?
12. What is the purpose of the Keepers?
13. The Reapers even exist.
14. The Galactic Clensing cycle.

etc. ALL of these things and more we learned in the FIRST game. We learn nothing new except who the Collectors are in the second game. The plot doesn't advance at all. Everything that we love about the Mass Effect storyline with the exception of the Collectors came about as a result of game #1.

Therefore, it's very accurate to say that the story of game #2 was a little weak. It didn't advance the plot significantly. We didn't find out much about the origins of the Reapers or why they hate organics so much. We didn't find out much about how to fight them.

Basically the entire game was spent assembling a team for that suicide mission.

Not saying that the game didn't have some big time strong points. The graphical improvement for example, and a couple of the destinations were cool. The game improved BIG TIME on the side missions.

But the story was weak.

That is obviously subjective but whatever. (the story = weak)

Something to note about Mass Effect 2 is, it is a very different type of story then Mass Effect 1.

In the original it was our first adventure into a new world and it had lots of set up for the setting. It set up the galaxy as it is now... the history aswell as the big evil enemies and what they are doing. And alot more.

Mass effect 2 on the other hand. Took place in an established world. Sure they can show us new bits (and they did... Omega for example) But the core of the story is the characters. It was very much a character piece.

That is not to say that the original did not have strong characters. Just rather that the focus was more on the galaxy and setting.

Anyway what story was better is subjective. I've always been a character guy and I prefer 2. Obviously you prefer 1. But don't say that 2 was weak like its an objective fact. It is not (a fact).

[BeefoTheBold]

Commander Shep4rd wrote...

Plays like a shooter,Looks like a shooter,IS a shooter, a shooter/rpg hybrid.
It plays like a shooter because THATS how the combat works
the ´´RPG ´´ is in stats, customization, interactive dialogue with character building, leveling, skill trees etc.
All they are showing is the improved combat,in later trailers we´ll probably learn more about it,or better yet BE PATIENT AND WAIT FOR THE GAME TO COME OUT AND PLAY IT, then you can complain freely about eanything you want.

Actually, the whole point of reveals like E3 is to give people information to help decide if they want to buy the game or not. 

For many people, improved RPG elements are a big factor on whether they want to spend $50, $60 or more on the game. So telling them to just "shut up and wait until you play the game to decide ifthere's enough RPG" in it or not is kind of counter-intuitive.

If later trailers do indeed show many of the things you mention, then I, for one, will likely be much less vocal in my criticism because I'll have the information that I need. For me, the RPG elements are the MOST important thing and the combat elements are secondary. For others - like perhaps you - this would be the other way around.

But E3 is a BIG time to talk about your game and for folks where the RPG part is the most important piece in their decision making criteria, seeing an utter absence of information or emphasis on that makes them wonder if it's going to really be there at all.

Hence, they come to the Bioware forums and ask for more focus on this in the time between now and the release date.

[hitorihanzo]

BioWare is showing the action and set-pieces of the game because that's what will sell it to the masses. Also, people at E3 want see gameplay. BioWare still has 9 months to promote ME3. Oh don't want to know everything all at once, do you?

[Ixalmaris]

Schneidend wrote...

Ixalmaris wrote...

"Harder hitting weapons"
"Blend of Action and Cinematics"
"Holographic blade"

In the whole 5 minute stream he says only one sentence about the RPG elements that "You can choose the version of the power that you want"
But you already had that in ME1 and 2 for the high level power. Is that your "enhanced RPG elements"?

We know from articles in GameInformer that you evolve the same power in multiple ways over the course of its development, rather than just once when it's maxed out. In another interview, Casey also takes about how there will be an upgrade table where we mix-and-match different parts for our weapons, and that armor customization will be more robust as well. Those are your RPG elements.

No, those are buzzwords and mechanics. And unless shown I don't believe they exist in a meaningful way.

Modifié par Ixalmaris, 06 juin 2011 - 11:28 .

[TopcatPlayer]

Occulo wrote...

TopcatPlayer wrote...

No word on actual RPing elements like hacking and looting.

...I didn't know the Sly Cooper series were actually RPGs.

I was always under the impression that roleplay was about character building, and not just being a klepto' and hoarding.

I'm talking about skills (hacking as in computer hacking), things other than attacking powers, you know, the stuff we used to have in ME1. All the stat building (what little there was) in ME2 had to do with fighting, no actual RPing stats.

[aridor1570]

solmyr-fr wrote...

jakal66 wrote...

We need to see some footage of these so called enhance RPG elements we've heard so much about...period.That will end this debate and start another one.

Absolutely. Only a few words and answers to several features that were delayed (or drasticallychanged) in ME2 would be enough to make people (including me) stop worrying about the RPG side of the game (other than choice / story telling that are indeed awesome in all ME games but not enough to make the game an RPG)

- inventory ( where did my inventory go ^^ ? Christina Norman did a good przzi a long time ago about that but we have no true answer about the return of a true inventory ... if they are so much weapons customisations there must be one ... but if we can only get a limited number of weapons... it's possible that there will be no inventory :/ )

- XP for EACH enemy killed as in ME1 (or sub quest done/progress) and not at the end each mission as in ME2 (I really dislike the mission system on ME2... it breaks the game continuity). I assume every RPG fan enjoy earning XP ... I prefer to gain 100 * (100~200) XP for each enemy i kill every 20 seconds than one time 10000 XP at the end of the mission every two hours.

- lockpicking (hum sorry ... decryption ^^)

- enhanced skill trees (I think we can be relieved here assuming what they annonced about "multiple powers choices" is true)

- influence of RPG statistics (precision, damage...) on the shooter side of the game (Christina Norman said it will be more visible than in ME2 I think)

...

A simple "yes this feature will be in ME3"  (or no :'()  will easily relieved RPG fans ... I really do not know why they keep showing only the action-side of the game :'(

You make it sound like they've been showing us gameplay footage for months, this is THE FIRST time we see anything at all.

[Jaron Oberyn]

MissMaster wrote...

Can't really show any role playing with out spoilers.

False. They showed sequences where you could choose the dialogue that Shepard says, except they opt for automatic dialogue, and one or two instances where you can choose something small to say.

-Polite

[MGIII]

You, the player, are playing the role of Commander Shepard. You decide how the story plays out for Shepard.

In what manner is that not roleplaying?

[Nohvarr]

Ixalmaris wrote...

alx119 wrote...

It's just an E3 presentation... they can't show you the whole game with just a couple of demos man. RPG takes time in a game, and time is precisely what you must economize in a press conference as big as this one.

We have 10 minutes of gameplay + several trailers and short demos.
And not one RPG element.

The Witcher is a vastly different beast than ME 3. I've played the Witcher 2 I enjoyed it, but it's not Mass Effect. It had to show RPG fans all of that because the main character is even more predefined than anything in a Bioware game. You are Geralt, a male witcher whose look is predefined and has a very specific set of skills. In fact most of the actual upgrades in Witcher 2 feel more like perks than anything else, or traits to add to core abilites and not new powers/skills to be unlocked.

Simply put CD Project had a lot more to prove than ME 3. They had to convince gamers (fans of TW1 and new gamers) to give this new direction a try. ME 3 is simply polishing their combat, expanding their RPG elements and delivering on the promise of an epic finale.

[sympathy4saren]

MissMaster wrote...

Can't really show any role playing with out spoilers.

I believe you can. There can be explicit demonstration of inventory, skill trees, looting, user interface for statistical analysis of items and weapons....there is a vast amount that can be shown without spoiling.

[Sidney]

They want to excite people about the game. People beyond the OCD types who think that looting Gun IV and playing Simon to find a Turian Insignia constitutes fun. Go look at the DAO promo materials and it was all swooping dragons, cool spells and dude with glowing eyes.

[VoidCabbage]

I don't want an inventory, not in the usual sense anyway. I like the current load out method.

[BeefoTheBold]

VoidCabbage wrote...

That is obviously subjective but whatever. (the story = weak)

Something to note about Mass Effect 2 is, it is a very different type of story then Mass Effect 1.

In the original it was our first adventure into a new world and it had lots of set up for the setting. It set up the galaxy as it is now... the history aswell as the big evil enemies and what they are doing. And alot more.

Mass effect 2 on the other hand. Took place in an established world. Sure they can show us new bits (and they did... Omega for example) But the core of the story is the characters. It was very much a character piece.

That is not to say that the original did not have strong characters. Just rather that the focus was more on the galaxy and setting.

Anyway what story was better is subjective. I've always been a character guy and I prefer 2. Obviously you prefer 1. But don't say that 2 was weak like its an objective fact. It is not (a fact).

Actually, from a literary standpoint, not advancing the plot at all is synonymous with weak storytelling. It's just not always obvious in ME2 because it has such a great story that it inherited from ME1.

Take as an example the Harry Potter books. (Nowhere close to my favorite, but wanted to pick material that I'm reasonably sure that EVERYONE is familiar with.)

If all there was to the books was Harry's interaction with his classmates, and there was no magic involved, no Voldemort, no gradual build up to a final battle, no thwarting the bad guy, I'm pretty sure we wouldn't have had 8 different books.

A certain amount of character development is essential to make people care about what's happening, but if that is all that happens eventually people lose interest.

Certainly it is debateable on where that line is between the need to advance the plot and the need to develop the characters, but sooner or later if you DON'T advance the plot then the story falls apart. I think if ME1's plot wasn't so rock solid and if the setting hadn't been setup so well in ME1, the shortcomings in the storyline pacing in ME2 would have become much more apparent.

Probably 90% of ME2 was side-missions either recruiting characters or tending to their various problems across the galaxy.

Not saying this isn't important and a part of what made the game fun to play, but ME2 did not advance the plot from ME1 in any really meaningful way when you get right down to it. If the game hadn't happened and we went straight from ME1 to ME3, it wouldn't feel like we skipped over anything plotwise.

[Hathur]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Have people seen the newer Interview with Casey on Gametrialers? While still likely not enough RPG for you, it is pretty cool.

Keep it on continual play to see part 2.

While a truly great video and sequence in the game.. this video does not show or explain anything of the RPG elements.

In it, we see Shepard make just 1 dialogue choice when talking to the boy before returning to gameplay.

In the video itself, we see Shepard fighting and talking... but never talking with input from the player (this is fine.. but it's not a dialogue choice, thus not really showing any RPG elements).

As for rpg gameplay elements, there is none shown at all.. Shepard has no abilities (or didn't use any at least in those 2 videos) and Casey only mentioned for all of 3-4 seconds that skills now branch with greater variance.. and that's it, no other details or info.

I certainly don't object to the video & scene.. they were great... but there was almost no "RPG" aspects to it (dialogue or skills)... not a great idea to brag about that video as having RPG aspects in it.

I'm sure we'll see some in the days, weeks, months to come... but there was basically none in the videos you linked to 

[Jaron Oberyn]

MGIII wrote...

You, the player, are playing the role of Commander Shepard. You decide how the story plays out for Shepard.

In what manner is that not roleplaying?

Go back and play through ME2, and count the number of times that the game assumes control, no pun intended, of your character. Now, go back and play LoTSB and Arrival, and continue to see how many times the game assumes control of the character. How is it roleplaying when your dialogue choices and decisions are already made for you? How can each player have a unique experience when we all have the exact same auto dialogue/decisions being made? Do you consider simply choosing where shepard goes, or the orders in which the missions are initiated roleplaying?

-Polite

[Nohvarr]

sympathy4saren wrote...

MissMaster wrote...

Can't really show any role playing with out spoilers.

I believe you can. There can be explicit demonstration of inventory, skill trees, looting, user interface for statistical analysis of items and weapons....there is a vast amount that can be shown without spoiling.

Why would they show that at E3? People want confirmation that it's going to be the epic finish they've wanted, that's been shown via gameplay at set pieces. Slowing that down to show inventory to please people who will get what they want later gains them little.

You all complain now, but in six months they could flood the board with the RPG info you want and you all would be buying the game. So they show the action, characters, and stories to hook the majority of gamers, and then release more intimate RPG info late to pick up the spare.

Modifié par Nohvarr, 06 juin 2011 - 11:38 .

[MissMaster]

sympathy4saren wrote...



I believe you can. There can be explicit demonstration of inventory, skill trees, looting, user interface for statistical analysis of items and weapons....there is a vast amount that can be shown without spoiling.

Just because they did not show it does not mean it's not there.

[Ixalmaris]

MissMaster wrote...

sympathy4saren wrote...



I believe you can. There can be explicit demonstration of inventory, skill trees, looting, user interface for statistical analysis of items and weapons....there is a vast amount that can be shown without spoiling.

Just because they did not show it does not mean it's not there.

Just because they did not show it does not mean its there.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

Ricinator wrote...

sympathy4saren wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

i really dont understand. people are screaming about them not showing indepth dialogue in a 2 minute trailer at a press conference? really?

do you people not understand what this was?

No, we see pretty clearly this is a shooter.

yes they have indeed put RP and STORY to a back seat... considering they are making the final game a starting point for new people?? ****** off Bioware

Your post is so full of fail, that all I can truly do is eyeroll, sigh and facepalm at how poor it is.

Let's see... from what we've gathered from both previous to E3 and during E3...

ME3 is a story about the Reapers finally coming to the Galaxy and doing what they said they would and us trying to stop them.

Forgive me if am wrong, but isn't that part of a STORY? or does your mentally unstable mind have some even more bonkers idea of what a STORY is meant to be?

As for RP, basically due to decisions made both during the previous 2 games (something Casey has mentioned several times now) and most likely also choices made during ME3, the game will PLAY out differently depending on how you ROLEPLAYED gosh did I just say that word, why yes, I believe I did.

As for other 'RPG' mechanics, meh am not going to start getting involved in that stupid story as it has been said countless times before that people have different views on what makes and what doesn't make a game have anything 'RPG' in it. I merely decided to prove that you really aren't that bright if you are going to try claim that RP and story have taken a backseat over what little we've seen/heard so far.

[candidate88766]

VoidCabbage wrote...

I don't want an inventory, not in the usual sense anyway. I like the current load out method.

ME2's inventory was much better - you had to walk around the Normandy to customize your weaons and armour. It was more immersive and made much more sense than being able to carry around 60 guns in your magical backpack.

[aridor1570]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

MGIII wrote...

You, the player, are playing the role of Commander Shepard. You decide how the story plays out for Shepard.

In what manner is that not roleplaying?

Go back and play through ME2, and count the number of times that the game assumes control, no pun intended, of your character. Now, go back and play LoTSB and Arrival, and continue to see how many times the game assumes control of the character. How is it roleplaying when your dialogue choices and decisions are already made for you? How can each player have a unique experience when we all have the exact same auto dialogue/decisions being made? Do you consider simply choosing where shepard goes, or the orders in which the missions are initiated roleplaying?

-Polite

LoTSB and Arrival were briding DLC.

[Warlock Adam]

*sigh

Trollers gonna troll.

Game's not out until March, all we've seen is some snippets of shooter gameplay, and you're complaining already? Stop whining about lack of roleplaying in a demo designed to showcase the new gameplay features.

I guarantee if they had shown roleplaying and dialogue, people would have flipped a s*** over spoilers.

[BeefoTheBold]

MissMaster wrote...

sympathy4saren wrote...



I believe you can. There can be explicit demonstration of inventory, skill trees, looting, user interface for statistical analysis of items and weapons....there is a vast amount that can be shown without spoiling.

Just because they did not show it does not mean it's not there.

True. The problem is that Bioware has a credibility gap in this area at the moment that it didn't used to have. Fair or not, many folks aren't willing to just take Bioware at their word that these things WILL be there in the end product.

Or, to put it another way:

Just because they did not show it does not mean that it IS there.

[Ixalmaris]

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien wrote...

As for RP, basically due to decisions made both during the previous 2 games (something Casey has mentioned several times now) and most likely also choices made during ME3, the game will PLAY out differently depending on how you ROLEPLAYED gosh did I just say that word, why yes, I believe I did.

Which means ME 1 and 2 were RPGs. ME3 is just en epilogue to see how you choices in the previous game affect the world.

[Occulo]

TopcatPlayer wrote...

I'm talking about skills (hacking as in computer hacking), things other than attacking powers, you know, the stuff we used to have in ME1. All the stat building (what little there was) in ME2 had to do with fighting, no actual RPing stats.

I'll concede to wanting just a charisma skill instead of having to be either the paragon of righteousness or full-out renegade in order to be able to say the things you want to say. In ME2 I had to make Mordin out to be a callous, heartless villain capable of genocide to get paragon points so that later on I could stop my squad mates from fighting but still have them love me. That was painful. I personally thought those paragon options were quite douchey.