3223 réponses à ce sujet

[didymos1120]

Il Divo wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Umm, Super Mario World was the pack-in title for the SNES at launch. Hardly a "herald of collapse". Sonic was first released in 1991, and the Genesis wasn't discontinued until 1997.  Again, not much of a herald.

To be clear, is he referring to Super Mario world specifically? He could simply mean Super Mario as a series.

He specifically cited the SNES.  Besides which, citing the series as a whole is no better: the first Super Mario was the pack-in launch title for the NES, the system that made home consoles big business again after the crash of '83. And the video game market has not seen another crash since.

[Bnol]

Il Divo wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Umm, Super Mario World was the pack-in title for the SNES at launch. Hardly a "herald of collapse". Sonic was first released in 1991, and the Genesis wasn't discontinued until 1997.  Again, not much of a herald.

To be clear, is he referring to Super Mario world specifically? He could simply mean Super Mario as a series.

No idea what he is referring to, Super Mario as a game or a series didn't lead to the fall of SNES (nor did Sonic to Gensis) as the introduction of 32-bit game systems did.  Playstation, Sega Saturn, Nintendo 64.  Super Mario 64 was the best selling game of the Nintendo 64 so obviously people weren't tired of Super Mario at that point. 

[AlanC9]

Gatt9 wrote...

They didn't "Drive the change",  Bethseda's been making the same game with fewer features in it for 15 years

(snip)

 Look at Bethseda,  every release removes more RPG features,  despite the continual requests for them to be put back in.  

So Bethesda didn't change RPGs,  except that they did change RPGs? Taking out stuff is a change too, even if you personally don't like the change.

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...
For you. And yet as you can see in this thread and have spent the last 20 (or 30, or 40?) pages arguing, there are plenty of people here who think ME1 and ME2 is an RPG.

That's an understatement. A vast majority of people call the ME games RPGs.

Of course, they're all wrong because language means whatever Gatt9 says it does.

You could play DA:O without reading too, since 1 always advances the conversation and 1-3 always capture good-bad. 

KotOR, too, except for the confrontation on the Temple Summit. And people not only could play it without reading, some did play it without reading. We know this because there were complaints from people who accidentally went DS at the temple.

Hell, I'm not sure you couldn't get through the BG games that way too.

[Phaedon]

translucentwolf wrote...

I wish that Bioware would have another game setting, along the line of 'casual - insane', but for the rpg elements. For those playing the 'Casual' setting, weapons and armor would be run along the lines of ME 2, with minimal customization, and simple group based upgrades. For those playing the other end of the rpg elements scale, each character would be editable, along the lines of ME 1, or further.

That would let those who want to fiddle with what mods team member x has on her armor, while letting the casual gamer simply add +5% sheilds to the whole team.

And where would ME1's inventory fit? It offers no choice in progression and yet is considered as most people as tiresome.

Gatt9 wrote...
What?  Seriously?

If the box says RTS,  I really don't expect to find a Shooter inside.  Since I hate fighters,  I'm also pretty confident that any game with that label isn't something I want to look into.  

The genres work just fine.

Plus,  you may want to take a moment to notice all the shades of sub-genres in movies.  Horror's one of the easier ones:  Slasher,  Shocker,  Torture-porn,  Suspense,  and one other one I can think of.  

You can't claim it works for movies and not games.  It's the same difference.  The only problem is,  in games,  people keep trying to make one genre into another for some strange reason.  It's like claiming Slap Shot is a horror movie because someone wears a goalie mask,  and then demanding that all hockey movies from this day forward be made like Saw.

Nice self-contradiction there.

When you buy a shooter, not only do you have any idea how it plays (and they don't play either as classic FPS or classic TPS), but alsodon't have an idea as to what the content is about.

Is it a sci-fi story? A Duke Nukem style game? Do you play as a sniper? Does the game include stealth? Is it a horror shooter? Does it describe actual or fictional events?

[Phaedon]

Gatt9 wrote...
They didn't "Drive the change",  Bethseda's been making the same game with fewer features in it for 15 years.  It's not like they suddenly switched gears,  they just do an EA/NFL thing and release a new version of it every few years,  much like EA/NFL "Now with fewer features" thing as well.

"RPG" elements "removed", aside, every TES game plays somewhat differently. Therefore, they change.

Bioware didn't "Drive the change" either,  releasing a TPS with a story isn't changing RPGs.

1. Post opinion as fact
2. Don't answer to arguments towards that opinion
3. Repost opinion
4. ???
5. Short-term feeling of proft and/or satisfaction


"But ME2 is just a TPS"
"But ME2 isn't just a TPS, it also has x and y, and you consider those as RPG elements!"
"Yeah, but ME2 is just a TPS"

Basically the entire thread summed up.

[Someone With Mass]

There's really nothing to discuss that has anything to do with the topic of this thread, since ME3 will have stats and loot, even if it might not be in the way some people imagined.

[Phaedon]

Someone With Mass wrote...

There's really nothing to discuss that has anything to do with the topic of this thread, since ME3 will have stats and loot, even if it might not be in the way some people imagined.

I think that that was clear since the OP.

[Someone With Mass]

Phaedon wrote...
I think that that was clear since the OP.

Ha, true enough.

[Lumikki]

I don't know why we have to talk so much Gatt9's personal issues. While I do understand his and a few others conserns for classic RPG's future. Mass Effect is wrong game for classic RPG games future discussion as it's not even pure RPG, but cinematic action RPG with TPS combat. Game company has rights to make games they want and likes. We customers just deside what games we buy, we don't decide companies design directions. Complaining that company makes games for other players and not for me, is valid consern, but bashing companies games because person has different taste of games isn't.

Like sayed above Bioware has choosen design direction for ME serie and majority here in this forum even supports what they try to do in ME3. How well it will work, we will see, when the game is published. Because no game is ever perfect.

[Someone With Mass]

Just for the record, DA2 isn't setting a standard for the Mass Effect games, as they have little to nothing in common when it comes to development.

[SalsaDMA]

Lumikki wrote...

 Mass Effect is wrong game for classic RPG games future discussion as it's not even pure RPG, but cinematic action RPG with TPS combat.

Ahh....

But here we can disagree on the detail that while ME1 certainly was cinematic, ME2 was a game through and through.

Ironically, some of the things that made ME1 cinematic was cut out precisely because random people felt it was 'boring' just talking with people without having stuff to blow up every few seconds. I , on the other hand, welcomed the fact that the first time I came to the citadel I actually felt immersed because I was walking around, talking, exploring, and experiencing the world in a cinematic way, without being forced into random action sequences all the time just for the sake of them being there.

ME1 was all about the story. ME2 was all about the action.

[InvincibleHero]

People miss the whole point of RPGs. They mistake it as the rules system like the progenitor D&D. Even with heavy hack and slash D&D it means my character is me or what I want to make it. I decide what to do and define the personailty of the character and choose their words. Any game that allows this and ME does is a RPG. BWs defintion is close to mine. RPG doesn't need a single stat to allow you to become someone else.

All it needs are choices and consequences and the abilty to play things in whatever direction you want ie nice and not so nice. Whatever they call it a morality system gauges the personaility you give the character. It measures your RP much like a DM would, but as a CRPG it relies on numbers so you are stuck with earning renegade points or good points and these actions must be coded. Sometimes it seems silly that say a paladin can do many questionable actions and retain status and counter them by doing some good things, but it is one of the limits of CRPGs and I accept that.

Stats and classes are to define what your character cannot do not what they can. That is the only reason for their existence. It is to place limits on the character you created.

[Lumikki]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

 Mass Effect is wrong game for classic RPG games future discussion as it's not even pure RPG, but cinematic action RPG with TPS combat.

Ahh....

But here we can disagree on the detail that while ME1 certainly was cinematic, ME2 was a game through and through.

Ironically, some of the things that made ME1 cinematic was cut out precisely because random people felt it was 'boring' just talking with people without having stuff to blow up every few seconds. I , on the other hand, welcomed the fact that the first time I came to the citadel I actually felt immersed because I was walking around, talking, exploring, and experiencing the world in a cinematic way, without being forced into random action sequences all the time just for the sake of them being there.

ME1 was all about the story. ME2 was all about the action.

You attack agaist ME2 and then say how good it was in ME, that's all you do in you post here.

What this has to do with ME3 or my sentence what you quoted?

Modifié par Lumikki, 17 juillet 2011 - 10:50 .

[SalsaDMA]

Lumikki wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

 Mass Effect is wrong game for classic RPG games future discussion as it's not even pure RPG, but cinematic action RPG with TPS combat.

Ahh....

But here we can disagree on the detail that while ME1 certainly was cinematic, ME2 was a game through and through.

Ironically, some of the things that made ME1 cinematic was cut out precisely because random people felt it was 'boring' just talking with people without having stuff to blow up every few seconds. I , on the other hand, welcomed the fact that the first time I came to the citadel I actually felt immersed because I was walking around, talking, exploring, and experiencing the world in a cinematic way, without being forced into random action sequences all the time just for the sake of them being there.

ME1 was all about the story. ME2 was all about the action.

You attack agaist ME2 and then say how good it was in ME1 was, that's all you do in you post here.

What this has to do with ME3 or my sentence what you quoted?

If ME3 follows the trend of ME2 more than ME1, which the info leaked so far indicates, then I wouldn't call ME3 a cinematic experience but 'just' a game.

[Lumikki]

SalsaDMA wrote...

If ME3 follows the trend of ME2 more than ME1, which the info leaked so far indicates, then I wouldn't call ME3 a cinematic experience but 'just' a game.

Of course ME3 follows more ME2 design, because ME2 was FIX to ME1 issues. Only ME2 issue was that it did go too far simplifying or cutting off sertain RPG customations and elements. That's what they will restore in ME3.

You do know that ME2 was even more cinematic than ME1?

What you talked was not cinematic, you talked impression details. Like elevators in ME1. Impression details are something what gives player feeling that games virtual world is more alive. Like dog barking and so on.. Cinematic is about camera use and how combat and scene dialogs are used blend more smooth ways. Yes, ME1 also had good cinematic use, but not as good as in ME2. Yes, ME1 was better in impression details than ME2.

Modifié par Lumikki, 17 juillet 2011 - 11:11 .

[Phaedon]

ME2 was much more cinematic. And don't get too mad over explosions, if you replay the game you'll realize that there were few and they all made sense.

The camera took many more angles in discussions than in ME1, and the lightning system was probably one of the best I have seen lately. The engine isn't the most powerful one, but the graphics aesthetics looked sweet.

[Someone With Mass]

SalsaDMA wrote...

If ME3 follows the trend of ME2 more than ME1, which the info leaked so far indicates, then I wouldn't call ME3 a cinematic experience but 'just' a game.

You're right. Maybe we should have the option of sitting down and talk with the Reapers while they're destroying entire civilizations. Because, who would want to fight them?

[CroGamer002]

I'm sure ME2 didn't had much more explosions then ME1.

Modifié par Mesina2, 17 juillet 2011 - 11:14 .

[InvincibleHero]

Mesina2 wrote...

I'm sure ME2 didn't had much more explosions then ME1.

Well with the cain and nuclear explosions from headshotting mechs I'd say ME2 defintiely has the potential to have way more. I don't think that is a bad thing though.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Someone With Mass wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

If ME3 follows the trend of ME2 more than ME1, which the info leaked so far indicates, then I wouldn't call ME3 a cinematic experience but 'just' a game.

You're right. Maybe we should have the option of sitting down and talk with the Reapers while they're destroying entire civilizations. Because, who would want to fight them?

I know I wouldn't.
I demand my games be 83% cutscenes and 17% gameplay.

[Lumikki]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

I know I wouldn't.
I demand my games be 83% cutscenes and 17% gameplay.

Hehe, that would be like interactive movie.

I think the point is that both ME's had little too much combat. While it feeled little better in ME1, because in my opinion it's related vehicles driving. There was a lot of mako driving in ME1. It breaks the feel of combat, like dialogs scenes does too.

[InvincibleHero]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

I know I wouldn't.
I demand my games be 83% cutscenes and 17% gameplay.

So I take it you are a big Kojima fan then.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

I know I wouldn't.
I demand my games be 83% cutscenes and 17% gameplay.

So I take it you are a big Kojima fan then.

Sarcasm.

[InvincibleHero]

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

I know I wouldn't.
I demand my games be 83% cutscenes and 17% gameplay.

So I take it you are a big Kojima fan then.

Sarcasm.

Gotcha. That is one reason I could not get into playing MGS 4. I didn't mind watching my brother pklay bits and pieces because it was basically a movie with some action interspersed. Not my bag.