3223 réponses à ce sujet

[Gatt9]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

iakus wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

While what you say may be true, Mass Effect's conversation system/expressions were a new feature at the time. Sequels typically thrive on showing what they've done differently from past gameplay experience. With ME2, interrupts were the new feature.

What point is there in advertising features we already know will appear in the game? We know Mass Effect will have conversations, realistic expressions, and branching dialogue. We've had it for two games now.

The point is rpg mechanics haven't always been something to be ashamed of.  Once upon a time, Bioware played up the fact that Mass Effect was an rpg.  

Sure Kinect and the omniblade are new features for ME3.  But so is, say the workbech.  Or armor/outfit customization.  New leveling mechanics.

And interestingly enough, the only interrupt I recall being demonstrated for ME2 was throwing the Eclipse merc out the window.  Maybe cause it was so "bad****"

Except that conversations and dialogue are not RPG elements according to the purists in this thread.  I understand the point you're trying to make, but I would also point out that a lot has changed in the gaming world since E3 2006. Publishers like EA put a lot of stock in having big, boomy trailers.  We've seen the workbench and new skills system and frankly it looks like they just might hit that sweet spot between ME1 and 2.

Actually,  this is *exactly* how E3's been since the late 90's,  nothing's changed.  One year they even had strippers in the parking lot promoting games.

The only difference is,  now the only game to make is an FPS apparently,  since that's pretty much all that was shown at E3.

I don't think BW is "ashamed" of being an RPG dev.  DA:O was marketed heavily as the "spiritual sucessor to BG" etc.  It's just that ME is not an RPG like that.

Bioware isn't.  EA is.  DAO's marketing plan was in full effect long before EA took over.

My final thoughts on the whole debate:

Those who knock ME2 for being dumbed down in terms of RPG features might be right.  But all they've proven is that ME2 is even less of a traditional RPG than ME1.  Fine.  But that doesn't make it a lesser game.  So what if it's not an RPG?  Who cares what genre it most resembles?  It's all just semantic bull$**t that has zero relevance to whether or not it's a good game.  Getting rid of the inventory means ME2 is less of an RPG, fine.  Does not mean it's less of a game.  If you think that does weaken it, prove it by some way other than "other RPGs have an inventory and ME2 doesn't so its a crap RPG and by extension a crap game."  

Instead of criticizing it as an RPG, criticize it as a game.  Because all the Gatt9s have argued is purely opinion.  No one is claiming ME2 is this hardcore RPG.  I'm just claiming its a great game, based on its own merits, not how many RPG elements you can check off.  If you like hardcore RPGs and wish ME was one, that's fine.  But it's your opinion, and stop acting like BioWare has "sold out" because they didn't design the game exactly how you wanted.

I have criticized it as a game as well.  It's linear,  corridor-run,  the AI's a relic from the 90's,  and it lacks the most common and simple of features it's gameplay tries to represent. 

As far as my opinions go,  you may want to take a moment to read the topic of the thread,  it's about RPGs.

As far as Bioware selling out goes,  look at their games before EA bought them,  look at them now.  It's a marked difference.

Quick question: Have you who are comparing ME2 to Gears of War even played Gears of War? I have, and I can say that ME2 didn't even come close in the same categories

I have played gears of war,  and they're alot more similiar than you claim.  They're both linear runs,  in claustrophobic corridors,  both cover-based shooters,  both have no loot,  and you have the ability to kill everything in the game at the begining.  The difference is,  ME2's AI is hands down horrible,  all it does is stand in the same place without making any real effort to kill you.  Whereas at least GoW will try to flank you and flush you out.

They're alot more similiar than you claim.

[Il Divo]

Gatt9 wrote...

As far as Bioware selling out goes,  look at their games before EA bought them,  look at them now.  It's a marked difference.

I've played them all. I honestly haven't noticed much of a difference from their previous games, beyond having enjoyed ME2 more than any previous Bioware title, barring KotOR and possibly Jade Empire.  

Modifié par Il Divo, 15 juillet 2011 - 11:41 .

[Siven80]

Savber100 wrote...

Honestly even if ME3 has stripped away the stats and skills, i won't care... why?

The Witcher 2 (yes, I'm using a RPG that most of you love) was excellent because of the branching narratives, the music, the characters, the plot, and the choices/consequences not because of some stats or even leveling. Hell... if anything that gameplay dragged down the experience (not by much but it wasn't the game's best points) as things like the inventory was unintuitive and downright cluttered. The point is... if I had stripped or "dumbed down" those elements (stats, skills etc) away does it make The Witcher 2 a bad game or not a good RPG?

Me: No, in fact, it would have only opened up a greater opportunity for me to persuade others to play this game. Come one... who doesn't want to meet Roche, Saskia, and Iorveth? This game is freaking awesome yet many people won't touch this because these stats and levels are just overwhelming for people that don't have the time to invest too much into a complex system.

Just got to say Great post, and i agree 100%

[Someone With Mass]

Gatt9 wrote...

I have played gears of war,  and they're alot more similiar than you claim.  They're both linear runs,  in claustrophobic corridors,  both cover-based shooters,  both have no loot,  and you have the ability to kill everything in the game at the begining.  The difference is,  ME2's AI is hands down horrible,  all it does is stand in the same place without making any real effort to kill you.  Whereas at least GoW will try to flank you and flush you out.

They're alot more similiar than you claim.

Mass Effect 2 had loot, though not in the same fashion as other RPGs.

By "flush you out" you mean toss a grenade here and there, which isn't a ability most troopers in ME2 had until Kasumi's DLC.

Compared to ME1's AI, which consisted of running around like headless chicken and utter the three same generic battle cries over and over again, ME2's AI is a freaking tactical commander.

And I was capable of killing everything from the very start in ME1 too. It just took like a decade, because my weapons were crap, and that's not a challenge or anything, just padding. Artificial lengthening, if you will.

[Bnol]

Gatt9 wrote...

The only difference is,  now the only game to make is an FPS apparently,  since that's pretty much all that was shown at E3.

Here is just a list of the games EA had at E3, with the genre afterwards.  Yes I am risking classifying games that might not be RPGs.

Electronic Arts
Battlefield 3 <Shooter>
FIFA Soccer 12 <Sports>
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning <RPG, maybe it isn't but it has the stats/skills, loot, open world, exploration, crafting.  But it does have action style combat so maybe not.  Might have to see for yourself to give it the RPG seal of approval, >
Madden NFL 12 <Sports>
Mass Effect 3 <For argument's sake, PURE SHOOTER!!!>
NCAA Football 12 <Sports>
NHL 12 <Sports>
Need for Speed: The Run <Racing>
SSX <Sports>
Star Wars: The Old Republic<MMORPG>
The Sims 3: Generations <Social game?>

So it looks like EA is doing mostly sports, which is obvious.  But with RPG it has one single player title and then an MMORPG.  For shooters it has Battlefield and ME3.  Which means it is about a 2-1 shooter to RPG if you don't consider an MMORPG within the RPG realm or consider Kingdoms of Amalur not to be an RPG.  I would rather not go through the whole list of games.  But if you want to it is here.  I do see a quite a few non-shooter titles in that list so I don't buy this whole the entire industry is creating shooters argument.

Modifié par Bnol, 16 juillet 2011 - 01:43 .

[sympathy4saren]

What's new with the rpg elements? Any new news?

[Sanunes]

sympathy4saren wrote...

What's new with the rpg elements? Any new news?

I don't think there will be any new news on elements of the game until San Diego Comic Con or later.

[In Exile]

iakus wrote...

E3 2006 Mass Effect Demo

Yeah the final game turned out to be really different, but notice how they played up the conversation systems, realistic expressions, and branching dialogue.

"Mass Effect combines fast paced action with amazing tactical depth and a deep role-playing system"

Were you here for E3 2006? Bioware got blasted for a very boring presentation. It was like how DA:O got blasted for looking like generic fantasy and an LoTR rip-off after E3 2007 (or was it 2008?). 

Modifié par In Exile, 16 juillet 2011 - 04:13 .

[In Exile]

Sidney wrote...

More to the point why is it "Selling out"? Has Bioware ever claimed to be a maker of interactive inventory systems? Or more than X number of skills? No, they make what they call interactive fiction. The mechanisms are just a tool to help tell that story. There's nothing about stealing pocket change and selling vendor trash that helps tell the story in ME2 in anyway. Heck, in ME1 the way they shoehorned it in was stupid "Hi, I'm a crewman on your ship commander and I'll sell you stuff". I'm pretty sure it didn't go down that way on the USS Yorktown, "Sir, I'd like to outfit your dive bombers but you lack the needed cash to pay for them!"

I'm telling you, ME1 was designed as a back-handed insult to every 'traditional' RPG feature: loot, exploration, skill trees and shops. Sometimes it feels like the most brilliant sort of satire. 

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
That sounds terrific.  That's exactly the sort of character I enjoyed playing most in DAO, but sadly that character is, I think, wholly incompatible with the voice-actor they chose for Hawke.  He just doesn't sound like a guy who isn't sure of himself and wants to follow rather than lead.  But (based on your example) he does apparently behave like that.

The first Hawke I RP'd was entirely disinterested in being a hero. The story in DA2 works really well with that. Kirkwall falls apart around Hawke, but Hawke just isn't the hero people need. He's capable, intelligent, talented... but not a leader or a doer, and the people who do take action drive the story (e.g. a particular mage NPC). 

I'll agree the two systems should function similarly, but I also don't think the combat system should work as it does.

What do you mean?

One of BG's bigger failings was its prohibition against equipping weapons with which your class could not gain proficiency.

DA2 did this too. I think locking out the skill trees for NPCs is different from locking out the weapons. People can be bad at using things, and they may never be able to learn to use them well, but they can physically use them. Games shouldn't restrict that.

Just as I would like to be able to choose any of the dialogue options the game contains for that decision hub, regardless of whether my character's skils would allow hom to speak that line effectively, I would also like to be able to use weapons and even weapon techniques with which my character has no skill.  Why not let me try Whirlwind, even if its chance of success is tiny, and its chance of catastrophic failure is great?

The practical answer (with combat) is that it requires more combat animations, and those are costly.

More generally, knowledge of things opens up potential actions. Anyone can try to fix a computer, but even having the concept of 'replace damaged memory stick' as an intentional action requires knowledge of what it is a memory stick is and can do. 

Oops.  That was supposed to say "as long as the reaction is to characteristics that are not customised."

Okay, that changes the meaning. Could you clarify? I think I know what you're driving at, but I want to be sure before commenting.

That said, I think the game always asjks us to invent the reasons for any reaction if we want to know it.  Since we can't read the NPCs minds, we don't know why they reacted as they did, so if we want that information we always have to make it up.  That's as true in ME2 as it is in NWN.

An RPG will always require some mental crafting on the part of the player for the PC. The difference is how the game then allows the behaviour to be expressed. A reactive RPG has to allow for multiple actions that are addressed. Ideally, it should allow for multiple reasons (and a refusal to answer, i.e. any reason).

DA:O tried that model, and sometimes it failed (with Wynne and being a Grey Warden, because they didn't use the right refusal) but other times it succeded brilliantly (with the Guardian; especially with a mage PC being asked about Jowan).  

[In Exile]

Gatt9 wrote...
As far as Bioware selling out goes,  look at their games before EA bought them,  look at them now.  It's a marked difference.

KoTOR, JE, Mass Effect 1. I'm seeing less RPG elements, less inventory, less exploration, more fixed characters... 

[Iakus]

In Exile wrote...

iakus wrote...

E3 2006 Mass Effect Demo

Yeah the final game turned out to be really different, but notice how they played up the conversation systems, realistic expressions, and branching dialogue.

"Mass Effect combines fast paced action with amazing tactical depth and a deep role-playing system"

Were you here for E3 2006? Bioware got blasted for a very boring presentation. It was like how DA:O got blasted for looking like generic fantasy and an LoTR rip-off after E3 2007 (or was it 2008?). 

And was it the material or the presentation?  DId people find the way it was shown boring, or was it boring because we don't see Shepard stabbing people with a holographic switchblade to heavy metal music?

[littlezack]

In Exile wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...
As far as Bioware selling out goes,  look at their games before EA bought them,  look at them now.  It's a marked difference.

KoTOR, JE, Mass Effect 1. I'm seeing less RPG elements, less inventory, less exploration, more fixed characters... 

Especially Jade Empire. You can't change outfits on any of the characters, can't even level up anyone besides yourself, can't change their weapons, get very little in the way of customizing your own character, there's hardly any real inventory to speak of...damn you, EA! Oh, wait, Bioware made JE years before EA got to them.

[In Exile]

iakus wrote...
And was it the material or the presentation?  DId people find the way it was shown boring, or was it boring because we don't see Shepard stabbing people with a holographic switchblade to heavy metal music?

The material. Interactive movie was the description, and not a positive one. 

[Il Divo]

littlezack wrote...

Especially Jade Empire. You can't change outfits on any of the characters, can't even level up anyone besides yourself, can't change their weapons, get very little in the way of customizing your own character, there's hardly any real inventory to speak of...damn you, EA! Oh, wait, Bioware made JE years before EA got to them.

Such an under-appreciated gem too. Jade Empire hit all the right notes in terms of story, pacing, characters, and the art style. I'd kill to be able to play Jade Empire for the first time all over again.

[Il Divo]

In Exile wrote...

iakus wrote...
And was it the material or the presentation?  DId people find the way it was shown boring, or was it boring because we don't see Shepard stabbing people with a holographic switchblade to heavy metal music?

The material. Interactive movie was the description, and not a positive one. 

It makes me wonder how Heavy Rain was received at E3.

[littlezack]

Il Divo wrote...

littlezack wrote...

Especially Jade Empire. You can't change outfits on any of the characters, can't even level up anyone besides yourself, can't change their weapons, get very little in the way of customizing your own character, there's hardly any real inventory to speak of...damn you, EA! Oh, wait, Bioware made JE years before EA got to them.

Such an under-appreciated gem too. Jade Empire hit all the right notes in terms of story, pacing, characters, and the art style. I'd kill to be able to play Jade Empire for the first time all over again.

But...but how can you like it? IT'S NOT AN RPG!

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
One of BG's bigger failings was its prohibition against equipping weapons with which your class could not gain proficiency.  Single-class wizards couldn't equip swords.  But this design - this bad design - is something BioWare has kept using game after game.

What was so bad about this? The number of situations where it's worth equipping a non-proficient weapon is very small. I'd have gone the other way with this myself, but it doesn't seem like a big deal to me.

Just as I would like to be able to choose any of the dialogue options the game contains for that decision hub, regardless of whether my character's skils would allow hom to speak that line effectively,

This would require a fairly large zot commitment, of course.

That said, I think the game always asjks us to invent the reasons for any reaction if we want to know it.  Since we can't read the NPCs minds, we don't know why they reacted as they did, so if we want that information we always have to make it up.  That's as true in ME2 as it is in NWN.

Is "invent" the right word here? I've always seen this as an analytic activity rather than a creative one.

[Iakus]

In Exile wrote...

iakus wrote...
And was it the material or the presentation?  DId people find the way it was shown boring, or was it boring because we don't see Shepard stabbing people with a holographic switchblade to heavy metal music?

The material. Interactive movie was the description, and not a positive one. 

Guess they shoulda paid attention to the shooting and biotic demonstrations in the second half...

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

littlezack wrote...

Especially Jade Empire. You can't change outfits on any of the characters, can't even level up anyone besides yourself, can't change their weapons, get very little in the way of customizing your own character, there's hardly any real inventory to speak of...damn you, EA! Oh, wait, Bioware made JE years before EA got to them.

Such an under-appreciated gem too. Jade Empire hit all the right notes in terms of story, pacing, characters, and the art style. I'd kill to be able to play Jade Empire for the first time all over again.

Well, combat was kinda rock-paper-scissors, even worse than ME2 actually.  But between the gems you can slot in and the attribute points you could distribute, combined with the weapons, martial arts styles, and spells you could learn allowed for a nice range of customization.  What I wouldn't give to be able to put a gem-studded amulet on commander Shepard...

[In Exile]

iakus wrote...
Guess they shoulda paid attention to the shooting and biotic demonstrations in the second half...

Been there. Argued that. 

[marshalleck]

Jade Empire was terrible, even worse than DA2

[marshalleck]

Il Divo wrote...

In Exile wrote...

iakus wrote...
And was it the material or the presentation?  DId people find the way it was shown boring, or was it boring because we don't see Shepard stabbing people with a holographic switchblade to heavy metal music?

The material. Interactive movie was the description, and not a positive one. 

It makes me wonder how Heavy Rain was received at E3.

Mostly positive from what I can recall, and mostly because of this which is much better than anything seen in Mass Effect, which is sterile and flat in comparison (and often even when considered on its own).

Modifié par marshalleck, 16 juillet 2011 - 06:38 .

[Juha81FIN]

You do realize that Jade Empire was used as testbed for their future games. For me it was nice, simple and fun game. (going offtopic)

[In Exile]

Juha81FIN wrote...

You do realize that Jade Empire was used as testbed for their future games. For me it was nice, simple and fun game. (going offtopic)

Apparently the brainstorm for JE2 involved a lot of conceps that bled into future Bioware games, like the interrupt.