3223 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarevok Synder]

Phaedon wrote...

I find your flexibility with facts and dismissing debates all together very interesting.

Playing only with weapons makes ME2 shooter-based only, but playing only with powers doesn't make it RPG-based only. Coolio.

Powers are nothing but weapons with a different twist. The mechanics are shooter based, this the fact. As for so called "debates," I've better things to be doing. One glance at your page is all I need to know that you live on this forum.  

[Phaedon]

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Powers are nothing but weapons with a different twist. The mechanics are shooter based, this the fact. As for so called "debates," I've better things to be doing. One glance at your page is all I need to know that you live on this forum.  

Powers are connected to statistical progression. Fact.
Powers have been in some form in most "RPG"s. Fact.

What you say is not fact, because if you are going to link weapons to shooters, then you'll have to link powers to "RPG
"s

 I've better things to be doing. One glance at your page is all I need to know that you live on this forum.  

Funny, you were here an entire day debating on inventory while different posters came and went. You also debated on weapons, a person modding a game for year(s), which you instead claimed to be 5 months, the development process of a corporation, etc.

[Sarevok Synder]

Phaedon wrote...

Snip

Wow you still love the long-winded statements. All of that has been discussed to death as well as answered, repeating it won't change anything. Progression doesn't change what the core Mechanic is. Yes, I wasted most of my day here, but I'm rarely here. You're always here.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 16 juillet 2011 - 11:40 .

[Someone With Mass]

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Wow you still love the long-winded statements. All of that has been discussed to death as well as answered, repeating it won't change anything. Progression doesn't change what the core Mechanic is. Yes, I wasted most of my day here, but I'm rarely here. You're always here.

What does that have to do with...anything regarding this topic?

If you think you're so much better than everyone else because you don't spend much time here, then you can always leave.

[Sarevok Synder]

Someone With Mass wrote...

What does that have to do with...anything regarding this topic?

If you think you're so much better than everyone else because you don't spend much time here, then you can always leave.

Just explaining why I'm not interested in endless so called "debate."
 
Don't worry, I'm about to leave.

[Phaedon]

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Wow you still love the long-winded statements. All of that has been discussed to death as well as answered, repeating it won't change anything. Progression doesn't change what the core Mechanic is.

Long-winded statements? You must be new around here.  That post took me 30 seconds.

You have yet to bring a decent argument into the table. You only say the same, pardon my french, bull****.

You have yet to prove your point,and yet your state it as a fact.
You claim that statistical progression are important components of an RPG, and yet, you clai that the effects of statistical progression still refer to a shooter mechanic.

And the worst thing is that you probably consider ME1 as a shooter/RPG hybrid, but you don't think that for ME2.

Yes, I wasted most of my day here, but I'm rarely here. You're always here.

I spend 2-3 hours in average here. Sometimes more. That, along with half an hour or one hour of gaming makes up the time I spend on my PC. I rarely post in other forums, part of the magic of the universe is that it's so deep that great debates and discussions can come from it. Unlike this one. If you don't like that, deal with it. 

Modifié par Phaedon, 16 juillet 2011 - 12:00 .

[Phaedon]

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Just explaining why I'm not interested in endless so called "debate."
 
Don't worry, I'm about to leave.

You sure as hell seem like it. You post replies every few minutes which mostly hold "punchlines" in the form of "so do you" or "that's a fact. Deal with it", without carrying any argument whatsoever. 

You need to start justifying your "facts" now and then.

[Sarevok Synder]

30 seconds, yet you were 20 minutes in replying. Claiming I repeat myself, when that's all you do. Hmm.....A self-righteous, delusional.

And with that; I'm done; your blathering no longer warrants a response. Enjoy the rest of your life here!

[Someone With Mass]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

30 seconds, yet you were 20 minutes in replying. Claiming I repeat myself, when that's all you do. Hmm.....A self-righteous, delusional.

And with that; I'm done; your blathering no longer warrants a response. Enjoy the rest of your life here!

Weren't you leaving? Unless, you're getting off on telling people how to spend their time, which is a whole new level of sad if you ask me.

Trust me. I think this thread and this forum can live without pompous douchebags like yourself.

[Phaedon]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

30 seconds, yet you were 20 minutes in replying. Claiming I repeat myself, when that's all you do. Hmm.....A self-righteous, delusional.

And with that; I'm done; your blathering no longer warrants a response. Enjoy the rest of your life here!

19-10= 9 minutes last time I checked.

You must be really egocentric thinking that everyone here rushes to reply to you.

You should have left 2 days ago. You have only been accusing people and saying that your opinion is a fact, like many others who share your opinion. 

The entire argument is so extremely flawed considering that it's based on "There is only one definition for RPGs, if BioWare doesn't follow it, it makes generic games and TPSs"

The entire debate is a joke, along with the OP.

PS: I finished this post from 15:12 to 15:13 local time, I am just saying so that you don't mess up the math again. 

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

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...

Combat was very rock-paper-scissors, but the game managed to rise above this through its other elements. I also thought that the combat had an elegant simplicity to it. Jade Empire was designed as an action RPG, but unlike Mass Effect the RPG elements did not feel shoe-horned in. The Dragon Amulet provided customization, without being massive or clunky. Admittedly the game was very linear, but this allowed Bioware to actually create a focused narrative, which I found better than most of their other games, except maybe BGII. The only real criticism I can apply to Jade Empire is that there weren't enough weapon styles in the game, which I found disappointing.

Modifié par Il Divo, 16 juillet 2011 - 01:53 .

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

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

It was there, for about 50 seconds. But I think it's pretty clear that the combat/biotics was given background treatment, which as a Bioware fan I think is fine, but I don't think anyone else would be too impressed at that point in the demo. Nothing that Bioware showed in that presentation made the gameplay seem altogether impressive, primarily because they were focused on introducing the new universe and the dialogue wheel.

[EternalPink]

Lumikki wrote...

You mean like paragon/renegade paths aren't good vs evil, but compassion vs ruthless. Different ways into same end goal, what is save the galaxy.

The last game i recall that allowed you to be "evil" was BG2 and to be honest the evil dialogues generally didn't make sense and involved shooting yourself in the foot for small immediate gain.

But i don't think this was due to suddenly poor writing as soon as they started creating the evil dialogue options but from the need to get the game published, past censors, past media looking for someone to lynch under the banner of declining moral standards and so on

ME1 was flamed by the media for the bit of cgi porn from the romanace (didn't understand the logic of it considering you can access the 9 billion porn webpages on the net much easier than progress a game to see a side boob but...)

So by changing it to light/dark or paragon/renegade they can present you with some morally iffy choices without the risk of being named the corruptor of society

[Gatt9]

Lumikki 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"

E3 2011 Mass Effect 3 Demo

"Mass Effect 3 is all about kick-**** action, choices with consequence, and immersion in an epic  sci-fi universe"

Oh, and Kinect...

Marketing allways sales what's new, not something what's has been same for 5 years.

Ironically,  the only thing that is new in ME2 is the interrupts,  *everything* else in the game has been done before.  So basically what you're saying is that the demo should've been all about interrupts and nothing else?

Marketing is about bullet points,  buzzwords,  and chasing after the latest gaming fad today.  10 years ago,  marketing was about actually telling people why your game was great.  As a point of reference,  look at the sentence there,  "Immersion" has no meaning in describing a game,  it's completely impossible to have an "Immersive" video game without a Holodeck.

And BioWare showing a dialogue scene with animation features that existed in the gaming industry for years, turned out so well for them.

The point of Marketing is not to make a rich game, since they have no inclusion in the development process at all. It's to grab people by the ear and yell at them: 'You MUST buy this. Do you hear me?'

Besides, BW did show off their e-peen a few times, and without it ME's sales would probably not have been as successful.

So you're saying that the only way to get people to buy games today is to show them a Shooter?

Which results in the conclusion that the only game to make today is a Shooter?

Or is the problem that Bioware is mislabelling Shooters as RPG?

Ironically,  you guys love tossing around the word "Cinematic",  and yet so many movies manage to have trailers that focus only on dialogue,  and sell very well. 

AlanC9 wrote...
And while Bioware doesn't define gaming, neither do you. You may not accept ME2 as an RPG, but others do.

Edit: The underlying question is what it means for a genre distinction to "work." Your definition may be coherent, but I don't see how it's useful.

You know that I agree with you most of the times, but I'll stop you there.

BioWare doesn't define gaming? Or at least their games?

If games are art, then doesn't each artist interpret art differently and implement their artistic vision differently?

I doubt that BioWare makes their games by checking a big checklist about what is a true RPG and what is a true shooter, and then implement each feature after another.

That's the equivallent of complaining about one of Picaso's drawings not being surrealist enough, and claiming that Picaso did drawings so that they could be 'as surrealist as possible, and hipster as f**k'

Bioware doesn't define gaming,  and I don't have to define gaming.  It's been defined for,  in most cases,  nearly 30 years.  Long before Bioware was around. 

Slapping "RPG" on the box of a Shooter doesn't mean that's what RPGs are now.  It means Bioware's mislabelling their games.  An RPG is an RPG,  the same thing it was 30 years ago,  the same thing it is today.  Bioware doesn't have the power to define RPG now equals Shooter,  not anymore than I have the power to define Chrysler equals Corvette.

As far as the art question goes,  you're assuming that Bioware is in control of the direction of development,  they're not,  and it's *really* obvious at this point.

Look at DA2,  Bioware had so little control over it that one of their best Dev's left.  Look at ME3,  Bioware has so little control over it that they're adding Kinect voice control to it,  despite the fact that it's obviously a worthless feature.  It adds nothing to the game,  doesn't improve it in any way.

Then there's the high probability that they're adding multiplayer to a single player RPG that has no capacity for multiplayer.

This has long since ceased to be art,  and is nothing more than someone checking off a list of a Suit's bullet points of "Must have features".  They certainly aren't trying to make the most memorable product ever,  not when they're tossing in features that don't do anything at all towards improving the game experience.

Because I mean seriously,  how is the gaming experinece really improved by reading the screen out loud,  to then hear Shepherd say something completely different?  How is it improved by adding multiplayer to a heavily narrative driven game?

E3 showed very,  very,  clearly that gaming has ceased to be art.  "Shooter,  Shooter,  Shooter!",  it's not art when everyone's doing the exact same thing. 

[EternalPink]

I'm sorry where are you getting this 30 years from?

30 years ago the first IBM 286 PC was only just entering the market and other than the rich and people who had relations/parents working within the emerging IT market they were beyond the means of the majority of people.

There were none/basic graphics

So where are you getting this romatisied idea of the PC games from yester year?

[Sarevok Synder]

EternalPink wrote...

I'm sorry where are you getting this 30 years from?

30 years ago the first IBM 286 PC was only just entering the market and other than the rich and people who had relations/parents working within the emerging IT market they were beyond the means of the majority of people.

There were none/basic graphics

So where are you getting this romatisied idea of the PC games from yester year?

I'm pretty sure he's referring to PnP Dungeons and Dragons.

[Someone With Mass]

Yeah, let's judge a whole game based of a thirty minute, incomplete demo.

And I don't think the people at E3 wants to sit down in a room packed to the brink and listen to some guy explaining how good RPG elements their game has.

But go on and bit*h about it. Won't change anything.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 16 juillet 2011 - 04:04 .

[Lumikki]

Gatt9 wrote...

Lumikki 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"

E3 2011 Mass Effect 3 Demo

"Mass Effect 3 is all about kick-**** action, choices with consequence, and immersion in an epic  sci-fi universe"

Oh, and Kinect...

Marketing allways sales what's new, not something what's has been same for 5 years.

Ironically,  the only thing that is new in ME2 is the interrupts,  *everything* else in the game has been done before.  So basically what you're saying is that the demo should've been all about interrupts and nothing else?

I ques you just win the nobel as your excelent understanding of what's games and marketing are all about.

Modifié par Lumikki, 16 juillet 2011 - 04:17 .

[SalsaDMA]

EternalPink wrote...

I'm sorry where are you getting this 30 years from?

30 years ago the first IBM 286 PC was only just entering the market and other than the rich and people who had relations/parents working within the emerging IT market they were beyond the means of the majority of people.

There were none/basic graphics

So where are you getting this romatisied idea of the PC games from yester year?

From wiki regarding a certain 'should be' well known machine:

During the C64's lifetime, sales totalled between 12.5 and 17 million units, making it the best-selling single personal computer model of all time.[5][6]
For a substantial period of time (1983–1986), the C64 dominated the
market with between 30% and 40% share and 2 million units sold per year,[7] outselling the IBM PC clones, Apple Inc. computers, and Atari 8-bit family
computers. Sam Tramiel, a former Atari president and the son of
Commodore's founder, said in a 1989 interview "When I was at Commodore
we were building 400,000 C64s a month for a couple of years."[8]]

According to my calendar, we are in the year of 2011 right now. That makes it roughly 30 years since the C64 was released (volume production was started in 1982).

I haven't even bothered looking at when the vic 20 or other machines of that era were released, but realize that the PCs were the underdog back then, not the topdog. PC games were crap compared to games on the other systems, which makes me wonder why you ignore other systems while focusing on PCs when we are talking about computer games in general.

Edit: and according to http://en.wikipedia....ing_video_games the genre actually began as early as the mid 1970'ies...

Modifié par SalsaDMA, 16 juillet 2011 - 04:20 .

[EternalPink]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

EternalPink wrote...

I'm sorry where are you getting this 30 years from?

30 years ago the first IBM 286 PC was only just entering the market and other than the rich and people who had relations/parents working within the emerging IT market they were beyond the means of the majority of people.

There were none/basic graphics

So where are you getting this romatisied idea of the PC games from yester year?

I'm pretty sure he's referring to PnP Dungeons and Dragons.

I've just looked and...

"This is the format in which role-playing games were first popularized. The first commercially available RPG, Dungeons & Dragons (D&D), was inspired by fantasy literature and the wargaming hobby and was published in 1974"

So in his opinion despite the medium for the games not actually being available/created yet all the genres that would eventually ( about 20/30 years later) become PC games had already been rigidly defined in 1974.

I'm sorry Gatt but i think your logic is flawed

For those that are curious the video game industry was not even considered to be a industry until 1975 with the commercial release of pong so those dudes that made all the genres in 1974 before they even knew there would be a video game industry must have been clairvoyant

Shame they didn't write down this weeks lottery numbers

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Yeah, let's judge a whole game based of a thirty minute, incomplete demo.

And I don't think the people at E3 wants to sit down in a room packed to the brink and listen to some guy explaining how good RPG elements their game has.

But go on and bit*h about it. Won't change anything.

And that's the point why these 100+ pages are useless. I loled seeing that it got so far.

Major chances are, they won't change a thing. This is mostly still feedback on ME1xME2 rpg elements, which they already have seen and already know what they'll do about it.

[EternalPink]

SalsaDMA wrote...

EternalPink wrote...

I'm sorry where are you getting this 30 years from?

30 years ago the first IBM 286 PC was only just entering the market and other than the rich and people who had relations/parents working within the emerging IT market they were beyond the means of the majority of people.

There were none/basic graphics

So where are you getting this romatisied idea of the PC games from yester year?

From wiki regarding a certain 'should be' well known machine:

During the C64's lifetime, sales totalled between 12.5 and 17 million units, making it the best-selling single personal computer model of all time.[5][6]
For a substantial period of time (1983–1986), the C64 dominated the
market with between 30% and 40% share and 2 million units sold per year,[7] outselling the IBM PC clones, Apple Inc. computers, and Atari 8-bit family
computers. Sam Tramiel, a former Atari president and the son of
Commodore's founder, said in a 1989 interview "When I was at Commodore
we were building 400,000 C64s a month for a couple of years."[8]]

According to my calendar, we are in the year of 2011 right now. That makes it roughly 30 years since the C64 was released (volume production was started in 1982).

I haven't even bothered looking at when the vic 20 or other machines of that era were released, but realize that the PCs were the underdog back then, not the topdog. PC games were crap compared to games on the other systems, which makes me wonder why you ignore other systems while focusing on PCs when we are talking about computer games in general.

The C64 was 1983 as your quote says, i was going for the benefit of the doubt so went for the earliest possible date and one of my friends actually had a 286 PC so it was the first that came to my mind, the C64 was before my time really since in 1983 i was 2 but i did have a 386 as soon as they came out (man my friends were jealous)

[Sarevok Synder]

SalsaDMA wrote...


According to my calendar, we are in the year of 2011 right now. That makes it roughly 30 years since the C64 was released (volume production was started in 1982).

I haven't even bothered looking at when the vic 20 or other machines of that era were released, but realize that the PCs were the underdog back then, not the topdog. PC games were crap compared to games on the other systems, which makes me wonder why you ignore other systems while focusing on PCs when we are talking about computer games in general.

Yeah, PCs didn't come into their own until the mid to late 90s. The 286's weren't available to the home consumer until the early 90s. The first system we had back in the parents’ home was an Amiga 500. Ah the memories.  

Someone With Mass wrote...
 Weren't you leaving? Unless, you're getting off on telling people how to spend their time, which is a whole new level of sad if you ask me.

Trust me. I think this thread and this forum can live without pompous douchebags like yourself.

I couldn’t care less how you spend your time, but don’t expect me to waste my life as you’re doing. I’m sure it can survive without me; but “pompous douchebags” like you will always be here.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 16 juillet 2011 - 09:05 .

[Sarevok Synder]

EternalPink wrote...


I've just looked and...

"This is the format in which role-playing games were first popularized. The first commercially available RPG, Dungeons & Dragons (D&D), was inspired by fantasy literature and the wargaming hobby and was published in 1974"

So in his opinion despite the medium for the games not actually being available/created yet all the genres that would eventually ( about 20/30 years later) become PC games had already been rigidly defined in 1974.

I'm sorry Gatt but i think your logic is flawed

For those that are curious the video game industry was not even considered to be a industry until 1975 with the commercial release of pong so those dudes that made all the genres in 1974 before they even knew there would be a video game industry must have been clairvoyant

Shame they didn't write down this weeks lottery numbers

Yeah but I'm pretty sure he was talking about the Mechanics which were set down long before PCs ever became an issue.

Phaedon wrote...
19-10= 9 minutes last time I checked.

You must be really egocentric thinking that everyone here rushes to reply to you.

You should have left 2 days ago. You have only been accusing people and saying that your opinion is a fact, like many others who share your opinion.

The entire argument is so extremely flawed considering that it's based on "There is only one definition for RPGs, if BioWare doesn't follow it, it makes generic games and TPSs"

The entire debate is a joke, along with the OP.

PS: I finished this post from 15:12 to 15:13 local time, I am just saying so that you don't mess up the math again.

Actually it was 33-15 = 18 Minutes. It doesn’t surprise me that you’re a bald faced liar on top of being self-righteous and delusional. Not to mention; long-winded has nothing to do with a person’s typing speed but rather their ability to state their point without resorting to walls of text. As William Shakespeare said: ”brevity is the sole of wit.”

I’ve backed up my opinion, but was swamped by you and your cronies constantly asking me things which had already been answered. Then you accuse me of bringing nothing but punch-lines when I gave up repeating myself. To top it off you accuse me and others of claiming our opinions are fact; all the while being oblivious to the hypocrisy of your own position; since you clearly think your opinions are fact.

To end this; you clearly have a lot more spare time on your hands than I or others; then believe you “won” your point after constant repetition and these same people lose interest and move on. You haven’t.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 17 juillet 2011 - 01:18 .

[Lumikki]

What are you arguing?

PnP RPG, D&D in 1974
Text based cRPG, Zork in 1977
Graphical cRPG, Dragon Warrior (Dragon Quest) in 1986

Modifié par Lumikki, 16 juillet 2011 - 04:30 .