225 réponses à ce sujet

[SalsaDMA]

Il Divo wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

playing as yourself doesn't count as playing a role

In Halo, I take the role of Master Chief battling covenant to save humanity. In Half-Life, I'm Gordon Freeman. In Assassin's Creed, I am Altair. These are 'roles'.

Here's where the problem with these narrow definition of RPGs arise. You propose that only choice, narrative, dialogue, etc, define the RPG. Everything else (all the numbers) are just statistics and are absolutely irrelevant to the definition. Well, there's a separate opinion which states that only the numbers are relevant to a role-playing game who claim that everything you consider to define an RPG to really be 'adventure game elements'.

Here's where both those definitions run into problems. Let's take Baldur's Gate 1, a game far more numbers heavy than it was role-playing heavy.

I've never seen anyone refer to it as an RPG/numbers game hybrid (as per your definition) or as an RPG/adventure game hybrid (as per the contrary position).Bioware labeled their game an 'RPG' and they've been pretty consistent about doing this.  'mmoRPG', 'action RPG', and 'JRPG' are all types of RPG which can often have no choice attached to them. Yet, still they are popularized as RPGs. Whatevere some might think the definition is based on pen and paper, definitions can change and evolve over time, especially when we adapt from pen and paper to the cRPG.

I never tried Halo, so can't comment on those. But neither Half life nor assassins creed are something I consider as roleplaying games, no.

Hell, by your take now, Serious Sam is a role playing game?

[Il Divo]

SalsaDMA wrote...

I never tried Halo, so can't comment on those. But neither Half life nor assassins creed are something I consider as roleplaying games, no.

Hell, by your take now, Serious Sam is a role playing game?

You might want to try rereading my post.

Your post: rpg means role playing game. plain and simple.

This seems to imply that the definition of 'role-playing game' can be determined simply through terminology. But if you really want to apply that logic, every game involves 'playing a role'. This is an even more literal definition of role-playing game than the one you are attempting to use. Hence why your point that 'role-playing games' must only involve role-playing does not hold. In which case, you are using 2 + 2 = 5 logic.

Bioware has released Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Dragon Age: Origins. They did not call them 'role-playing/statistics games'. They were simply role-playing games.

Modifié par Il Divo, 12 juin 2011 - 03:25 .

[SalsaDMA]

Il Divo wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

I never tried Halo, so can't comment on those. But neither Half life nor assassins creed are something I consider as roleplaying games, no.

Hell, by your take now, Serious Sam is a role playing game?

You might want to try rereading my post.

Your post: rpg means role playing game. plain and simple.

This seems to imply that the definition of 'role-playing game' can be determined simply through terminology. But if you really want to apply that logic, every game involves 'playing a role'. This is an even more literal definition of role-playing game than the one you are attempting to use. Hence why your point that 'role-playing games' must only involve role-playing does not hold. Bioware has released Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Dragon Age: Origins. They did not call them 'role-playing/statistics games'. They were simply role-playing games.

Well, by that take any game on the computer could never be a role playing game, cause you would need an active storyteller to give on the spot reactions to whatever you decided the characer whose role you played would do.

Computers are restricted by a finite amount of options available to the player.

And no, I do not consider it to be playing a role to point my mouse at something and click the button. By your anaology even playing chess would be a role playing game, which I doubt anyone sane would claim normally.

[Iakus]

I'd say it takes more than a character name to be playing a role.

I'd think in a role playing game you can take your character and infuse it with motivations and personality. Not just what you have in your head, but to actually express it as part of the plot.

In a role-playing game, it's not only what you do, or even how you do it, but why you do it.

[Il Divo]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Well, by that take any game on the computer could never be a role playing game, cause you would need an active storyteller to give on the spot reactions to whatever you decided the characer whose role you played would do.

Computers are restricted by a finite amount of options available to the player.

I'm not certain I follow your reasoning here. Your options are always restricted (even in pen and paper),according to the circumstances of the game. Computers certainly are more restrictive, but that's also why we have a separate designation separating 'cRPG' from 'pen and paper RPG'.

I'm arguing for a definition of role-playing game which takes into account the player's ability to make choices, create a personality, express dialogue, etc, but also takes into account accepted gaming terminology. 'MMORPG', 'JRPG' and 'action RPG' all being examples. Your definition says none of these can be role-playing games, despite the heavy ties they had in the days of pen and paper and despite their labels as 'role-playing games'. In this sense, I find your definition too restrictive.

And no, I do not consider it to be playing a role to point my mouse at something and click the button. By your anaology even playing chess would be a role playing game, which I doubt anyone sane would claim normally.

I'm glad you understand. In which case, we can toss the idea that 'role-playing games' must have 'role-playing' only because of the literal definition.

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

I'd say it takes more than a character name to be playing a role.

I agree, but that's why I find arguing that 'role-playing games' must (by its name) feature choices, dialogue, personality,etc, to be inconsistent. The definition, taken at its most literal, simply means 'to play a role'. So we can't rely on this definition to explain what an RPG is.

I'd think in a role playing game you can take your character and infuse it with motivations and personality. Not just what you have in your head, but to actually express it as part of the plot.

In a role-playing game, it's not only what you do, or even how you do it, but why you do it.

These certainly are my favorite aspects of the RPG. It's why I'm far more tolerant of Jade Empire, Mass Effect, and Mass Effect 2 placing less emphasis on the numerical aspects.

But I find it difficult to think that's all it encompasses. Baldur's Gate was labeled a role-playing game, which if all that matters is the motivation/personality completely ignores the d20 system. And in the case of Baldur's Gate, which was more focused on the d20 system than on playing in-character, it would be very strange to label it a 'role-playing game' if all that's relevant to an rpg is motivations/personality.

[Iakus]

[quote]Il Divo wrote...

[quote]iakus wrote...

I'd say it takes more than a character name to be playing a role. [/quote]

I agree, but that's why I find arguing that 'role-playing games' must (by its name) feature choices, dialogue, personality,etc, to be inconsistent. The definition, taken at its most literal, simply means 'to play a role'. So we can't rely on this definition to explain what an RPG is. [/quote]

Then it depends on what one considers the "role" in rpg to be:  "The protagonist" is way too broad a term.  Same with "character class"  That's why I decide that "Role" means "what kind of protagonist are you" as in, motivation, temperment, outlook, etc.

[quote]
I'd think in a role playing game you can take your character and infuse it with motivations and personality. Not just what you have in your head, but to actually express it as part of the plot.

In a role-playing game, it's not only what you do, or even how you do it, but why you do it.[/quote]

These certainly are my favorite aspects of the RPG. It's why I'm far more tolerant of Jade Empire, Mass Effect, and Mass Effect 2 placing less emphasis on the numerical aspects.

But I find it difficult to think that's all it encompasses. Baldur's Gate was labeled a role-playing game, which if all that matters is the motivation/personality completely ignores the d20 system. And in the case of Baldur's Gate, which was more focused on the d20 system than on playing in-character, it would be very strange to label it a 'role-playing game' if all that's relevant to an rpg is motivations/personality. [/quote]

I actually found BG to be very much a game about character, for it's time.  I find even most of today's non Bioware games can't really compete on that level.  Yes the mechanics are very much 2nd Edition D&D, and even today electronic games can only give a player so much freedom,  but if you translated Baldur's Gate's characters and storyline and transfered it into a Dragon Age system, or Jade Empire, or even Mass Effect, the game mechanics might be different, but it would be no less an rpg for it.

I am now imagining Aerie as an adept, Nalia as an Infiltrator, and Minsc as a krogan Battlemaster.  I need help...

[Malanek]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

I'm sorry but IGN's getting a little too dramatic. It's a video game. Virtual reality, not actual reality. Crying over pixels is pretty sad.

-Polite

It's a story. Have you never felt any emotion from reading a book, watching a movie or playing a game? If that is true I feel sorry for you. Traditionally computer games have struggled to get this emotional connect but they are getting better all the time.

[Khran1505]

I love how people are quick to jump onto how ME3 is going to be totally more action packed shooting than have any RPG elements. Are they just oblivious to the fact that showing off RPG moments in a game like customization, buying gear and going from point A to point B would be boring as hell? It's a demo to show off the true part of the gameplay which is the action that keeps our hearts racing with excitement. What do these people expect from an E3 demo of a game that won't be released till early next year?

[The Unfallen]

Bible Doctor wrote...

The Unfallen wrote...

 This is why Mass Effect 3 will bring Halo to its knees.

Why is an action RPG competing with an FPS?

I'm going with story not gameplay.

[Siansonea]

To me, ME3 will be a success if I cry, laugh, scream at the screen in anger, laugh some more, cry some more, and ultimately feel like I've been through the ringer emotionally as the closing credits roll. If my main sensation after playing the game is eyestrain and wrist pain, then we have a problem.

[Liec]

Here's a preview from gematsu:

http://gematsu.com/2...w-mass-effect-3

[Iakus]

Khran1505 wrote...

I love how people are quick to jump onto how ME3 is going to be totally more action packed shooting than have any RPG elements. Are they just oblivious to the fact that showing off RPG moments in a game like customization, buying gear and going from point A to point B would be boring as hell? It's a demo to show off the true part of the gameplay which is the action that keeps our hearts racing with excitement. What do these people expect from an E3 demo of a game that won't be released till early next year?

Oh, I dunno.  Seeing those power and weapon customization menus had me drooling more than any of the combat footage.  

And that includes the omniblade. 

[Yakko77]

Gterror wrote...

Damn IGN with their spoilers argh,but this is life

What was spoiled?  Was the ending shown?  Did they show how Earth is taken back and how the Reapers are beaten?  Even IF it was, how you get there is your own story.

Life is a journey, not a destination.

[SalsaDMA]

Khran1505 wrote...

I love how people are quick to jump onto how ME3 is going to be totally more action packed shooting than have any RPG elements. Are they just oblivious to the fact that showing off RPG moments in a game like customization, buying gear and going from point A to point B would be boring as hell? It's a demo to show off the true part of the gameplay which is the action that keeps our hearts racing with excitement. What do these people expect from an E3 demo of a game that won't be released till early next year?

Tbh I consider random action scenes just showing stuff getting blown up as being boring as hell. I can see stuff like that in almost every goddamn action game trailer.

Seeing stuff that has some meat on it, on the other hand, would be alot more interesting to me.

So in other words: What makes you tick (conveyer belt flash bang sequences), doesn't count for everyone.

[Gre3nham]

Could anyone link the actual video where the kid dies? I cant seem to find it.

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

Then it depends on what one considers the "role" in rpg to be:  "The protagonist" is way too broad a term.  Same with "character class"  That's why I decide that "Role" means "what kind of protagonist are you" as in, motivation, temperment, outlook, etc.

I wouldn't say character class is a broad term, especially as defined in games like Dungeons and Dragons. And  I favor those aspects you mentioned, but the definition needs to encompass our gaming terminology as well. That's why I keep bringing up old school rpgs where everything you mention was given much less emphasis. Or even WoW, given the label 'mmorpg'.

I actually found BG to be very much a game about character, for it's time. 

Yet, as ground-breaking as it may have been at the time, it still placed far more emphasis on numbers mechanics than it did on a player interacting with the environment. It gave precedence to the gameplay, not character/motivation. I'd say that the vast majority of my time in Baldur's Gate was spent exploring the map (which inevitably entailed killing things). There were no companions whom I could have a dedicated conversation with, many side quests were fairly straight forward in their implementation, and the first half of the main plot did constitute a scavenger hunt.

 I find even most of today's non Bioware games can't really compete on that level.  

But many of today's games aren't trying to compete. Halo doesn't claim to implement choice, so it's not really up for comparison in the first place.

Yes the mechanics are very much 2nd Edition D&D, and even today electronic games can only give a player so much freedom,  but if you translated Baldur's Gate's characters and storyline and transfered it into a Dragon Age system, or Jade Empire, or even Mass Effect, the game mechanics might be different, but it would be no less an rpg for it.

Actually, I'd argue that the game mechanics of 2.0 give far more freedom (of expression) than does Mass Effect or Jade Empire. The problem with this is that even if you were to translate Baldur's Gate into another system, you still the player spending far more of their time killing things than anything else. There was no "go back to camp and talk to your companions for a while" segment. You pick up Minsc, and go around killing things with Minsc. But the game, despite much heavier focus on exploration/combat, has been given the label 'rpg'. So which part is the rpg: the light amounts of dialogue, the large amounts of DnD mechanics, or (in my opinion) both?   

Modifié par Il Divo, 13 juin 2011 - 11:35 .

[xIREDEEMEDIx]

xSTONEYx187x wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

I'm sorry but IGN's getting a little too dramatic. It's a video game. Virtual reality, not actual reality. Crying over pixels is pretty sad.

-Polite

I cried at the end of Gladiator. 

I did too man..............I did too.....   

[Thargorichiban]

Liec wrote...

Here's a preview from gematsu:

http://gematsu.com/2...w-mass-effect-3

Nice review though he did get one part wrong: That wasn't a giant walking Geth, it was a Reaper.

[DarthKaldriss]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

I'm sorry but IGN's getting a little too dramatic. It's a video game. Virtual reality, not actual reality. Crying over pixels is pretty sad.

-Polite

           I find the best games/films/books and/or TV series are the ones that can get me emotionally engaged. For the most part Bioware have always ticked that box in there games. But each to there own I guess.

[DarthKaldriss]

xIREDEEMEDIx wrote...

xSTONEYx187x wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

I'm sorry but IGN's getting a little too dramatic. It's a video game. Virtual reality, not actual reality. Crying over pixels is pretty sad.

-Polite

I cried at the end of Gladiator. 

        


I did too man..............I did too.....   

                  I watched that at the cinema with my folks, I had tears in my eyes at the end too.

Modifié par DarthKaldriss, 13 juin 2011 - 05:06 .

[saracen16]

Mark my words: even though much of the hype on Mass Effect 3 was at E3 in Los Angeles, the release of this game will be a GLOBAL EVENT.

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...
I wouldn't say character class is a broad term, especially as defined in games like Dungeons and Dragons. And  I favor those aspects you mentioned, but the definition needs to encompass our gaming terminology as well. That's why I keep bringing up old school rpgs where everything you mention was given much less emphasis. Or even WoW, given the label 'mmorpg'.

Character class is a broad term, imo.  And it's purpose in an rpg isn't always important.  Customization, however, is.  Two warriors in DAO, even if they pick the same origin, can still play out very differently, for example.  Then there are classless rpg games, such as Fallout, Alpha Protocol, and Jade Empire.  And in Mass Effect, what class Shepard plays is meaningless to the story.

Yet, as ground-breaking as it may have been at the time, it still placed far more emphasis on numbers mechanics than it did on a player interacting with the environment. It gave precedence to the gameplay, not character/motivation. I'd say that the vast majority of my time in Baldur's Gate was spent exploring the map (which inevitably entailed killing things). There were no companions whom I could have a dedicated conversation with, many side quests were fairly straight forward in their implementation, and the first half of the main plot did constitute a scavenger hunt.

All true, but still, the first time I played it I was amazed at how  much I could impose my motivations on my character.  It was the next best thing to actually being at a gaming table.

But many of today's games aren't trying to compete. Halo doesn't claim to implement choice, so it's not really up for comparison in the first place.

I should clarify:  I find most of today's non Bioware rpg games can't really compete...

Actually, I'd argue that the game mechanics of 2.0 give far more freedom (of expression) than does Mass Effect or Jade Empire. The problem with this is that even if you were to translate Baldur's Gate into another system, you still the player spending far more of their time killing things than anything else. There was no "go back to camp and talk to your companions for a while" segment. You pick up Minsc, and go around killing things with Minsc. But the game, despite much heavier focus on exploration/combat, has been given the label 'rpg'. So which part is the rpg: the light amounts of dialogue, the large amounts of DnD mechanics, or (in my opinion) both?   

While the mechanics might give more freedom towards how you customize your characters' abilities and appearance (not an unimportant feature, I might add), I'd argue that as far as expression goes, it's in the choices the character is able to make.  Be it dialogue, combat, or even the freedom to choose right over left.  Plus the ability to articulate why you make the choices you do.

Yes in BG it would have been great to have more dialogue with your companions (especially Minsc) the dialogue you do get sets it above mere sword&sorcery adventure games like Diablo and makes it an "rpg" in my book.  On more than one occasion Minsc will speak up on the righteousness of a given cause, particularly when children are involved.  ANd you can respond with varying degrees of enthusiasm.  I believe in one case you can ask him if he's thought about having some restorative magic performed on his head...

Modifié par iakus, 13 juin 2011 - 08:36 .

[KiraTsukasa]

I thought this thread was to discuss what was shown for ME3 at E3, not an argument over the definition of an acronym.

[Zeevico]

Serious question to the devs:
If you let the kid survive, can we take him aboard and make him work, like some kind of 19th century chimney sweep in space?