3223 réponses à ce sujet

[KingNothing125]

Speaking of Oblivion (and I love it to death, so bear that in mind), it had one of the most tedious stats/leveling systems in all of gaming.

[EternalPink]

Inventory and stats do not make a RPG

Dawn of war 2 has both of those yet i most certainly wouldn't call it a RPG

In RPG games like baldurs gate you had a large inventory with a large item database and the more unique items had there own story (right click to access as i recall) and in a few cases were upgradeable (tho there were mods to add more craftable items) which helped to immerse you in the game by providing back story.

The back story part of todays RPG's seems to be carried out by codex's/journals (ME,DA,Witcher) so the story about the items is still there, just not tied to the item itself, so really have we lost anything?

DA2 sucked monkey nuts in my opinion not for the stats or the lack of a involved inventory but for the repetive use of maps, the end story being the same regardless of what you choose and the lack of ability to talk to companions except in certain locations ( i could go on but i won't)

[Time Well Spent]

Who really wants their combat accuracy depend on a stat versus an enemies "agility".
I want to point and shoot, and feel like a hero. Save the rpg elements for power progression trees, and leave the stats to a more traditional rpg. Fallout 3 puts some stats on it's gun play and it was the worst part of a great game.

I like loot, but hate having to sort out my inventory once it's full of +1 boots of treading. Mass Effect needs more gun and armor customization though, but not the excessive cluster of stuff from ME1.

[Mr. MannlyMan]

DaveExclamationMarkYognaut wrote...

This is correct. Numbers =/= deep RPG gameplay - just look at Oblivion. Deep gameplay is the result of deep options, not hitting the other guys in the face with the biggest numbers you can find.

But Oblivion does have stats...

Open-world environments and non-linear quests don't have anything to do with stats. Saying "Deep gameplay is the result of deep options" is also pretty vague. So the only thing that should matter about weapons is their sound and their appearance? Everything else is determined by stats; damage, firing rate, recoil, etc... how would adding stats to define those values diminish the experience of picking/choosing weapons to use? Should players be forced to experiment or look those value up online to make their decision? 

Or maybe guns should all have the same damage, the same reload rate, etc.?

[the_one_54321]

Summary of this thread:

Stats and loot are not RPG because I say so. Anyone that disagrees with me is lame and shouldn't be listened to.

Nice.

[Someone With Mass]

Loot was made obsolete when they introduced the micro-fabricators, and I don't really care about stats if they aren't above the way they were in ME1. Which was almost unnecessary as well, since it was always: "Here's my gun. Here's a slightly better version of that gun. I'll replace my current gun with it."

Aim for a good story, interesting characters and fluid combat instead.

[BlaznZero]

Yes! We get to punch a reporter again!

Third time's the charm!

[Lumikki]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Summary of this thread:

Stats and loot are not RPG because I say so. Anyone that disagrees with me is lame and shouldn't be listened to.

Nice.

That's not how it goes and you know it.

Meaning stats and loot aren't ONLY way to create RPG. Because RPG is very wide consept.

Also Mass Effect serie is NOT classic RPG. It has allways been hybrid of ACTION RPG and TPS combat.

People don't assume that every "RPG" feature is used in EVERY damm game what has some RPG in it.

Modifié par Lumikki, 30 juin 2011 - 10:58 .

[Icinix]

Darji wrote...

Ok here is Biowares take on deeper RPG mechanics for ME3.

Casey Hudson:
To us, the RPG experience isn't necessarily about stats and loot. It's about exploration and combat and making a good character-driven story and good progression.

Hmm -

Exploration - Check.
Combat - Check
Character-driven story - Well, kind of - but not quite.
Good progression - Check.

Yep - Duke Nukem Forever had those.  
The problem I think, is that those very things are open to as much interpretation as the tag RPG itself.  So Casey's response here - is as open as the question "What is an RPG?"

And can therefore be interpreted however you so wish.  Regardless, from the very, very, very limited amount of footage we have seen, ME3 looks more arrghhpeeegeee-er than ME2.

[Il Divo]

Darji wrote...


www.computerandvideogames.com/309188/mass-effect-3-bioware-on-surprises-inspiration-and-tough-decisions/

Guess they havent learned anthing from the feedback they recieved with Dragon Age 2.

Maybe because they were too busy learning from Mass Effect 1. I considered the handling of loot to be one of the worst I've ever seen in a videogame. I consider its removal a blessing.

Mass Effect is an rpg/tps hybrid. I personally do not want useless piles of weapons in this hybrid.

Modifié par Il Divo, 30 juin 2011 - 10:55 .

[Daiyus]

Honestly, I think what Mass Effect needs in terms of "RPG" is OPTIONS. More types of armour, more modifications, more weapons, more evolutions of powers, more choice in the loadout, more choice in your skills.

More options so that everyone has their own ways and means, own styles, own preferences. That's what makes an RPG for me. Some games I would be disappointed to not get a loot system (Elder Scrolls for example). But for Mass Effect it's just not really necessary if the options are given in another format, which is something ME2 laid the groundworks well for, now BioWare just need to build on it, a lot.

[EternalPink]

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

DaveExclamationMarkYognaut wrote...

This is correct. Numbers =/= deep RPG gameplay - just look at Oblivion. Deep gameplay is the result of deep options, not hitting the other guys in the face with the biggest numbers you can find.

But Oblivion does have stats...

Open-world environments and non-linear quests don't have anything to do with stats. Saying "Deep gameplay is the result of deep options" is also pretty vague. So the only thing that should matter about weapons is their sound and their appearance? Everything else is determined by stats; damage, firing rate, recoil, etc... how would adding stats to define those values diminish the experience of picking/choosing weapons to use? Should players be forced to experiment or look those value up online to make their decision? 

Or maybe guns should all have the same damage, the same reload rate, etc.?

You can be told something is better without adding numerical values, take the hand guns in ME2

Predator is the starter and we are told its the starter, when you get the hand cannon (carnifax?) it does not say it has X stopping power etc it tells you in the little description of the gun why its betters

I'm not saying that having stats diminishes play but by the same token having them doesn't add to the game play any either, does being told its a +1 magical sword really mean more than just magical sword?

The only time i can think of when the stats on items help is when your trying to decide whether to upgrade and if you have to fall back on comparing numbers (which if your RPing is a challenge) is when the description, game story, events around you acquiring the item and dialogue in general have failed.

[Il Divo]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Summary of this thread:

Stats and loot are not RPG because I say so. Anyone that disagrees with me is lame and shouldn't be listened to.

Nice.

Considering the OP's title, he had all the insults coming. I'm tired of fans attempting to manipulate dev quotes for dramatic effect.

[the_one_54321]

Lumikki wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
Summary of this thread:

Stats and loot are not RPG because I say so. Anyone that disagrees with me is lame and shouldn't be listened to.

Nice.

That's not how it goes and you know it.

Meaning stats and loot aren't ONLY way to create RPG. Because RPG is very wide consept.

Also Mass Effect serie is NOT classic RPG. It has allways been hybrid of ACTION RPG and TPS combat.

People don't assume that every "RPG" feature is used in EVER damm game what has some RPG in it.

Don't really care. I think "RPG" is a thoroughly useless and meaningless term. It means a thousand different things to a thousand different people, and it means something different for every game made by every developer based on who they want to sell the game to. I'm just pointing out how equally meaningless and useless comments like the above are as well.

[ShadowLordXXX]

Loot makes sense when you have interesting backstory to individual weapons, it does not make sense when each weapon is generic weapon x+ as it was in ME1. For example if in say BG2/DA:O there were no individualized weapons and instead just Long Sword +1, Axe +2 etc the loot system would be rather boring there too. But in these games special items makes sense, magic lets you create weapons with interesting powers and backstories, something you can't really do in the ME universe. Not to mention its immersion breaking for me at least to see Shepard carrying around a billion weapons and armor he isn't using.

[Iakus]

ShadowLordXXX wrote...

Loot makes sense when you have interesting backstory to individual weapons, it does not make sense when each weapon is generic weapon x+ as it was in ME1. For example if in say BG2/DA:O there were no individualized weapons and instead just Long Sword +1, Axe +2 etc the loot system would be rather boring there too. But in these games special items makes sense, magic lets you create weapons with interesting powers and backstories, something you can't really do in the ME universe. Not to mention its immersion breaking for me at least to see Shepard carrying around a billion weapons and armor he isn't using.

Which is why the return of the modding system is a good thing.  This way you can take a generic weapon, and trick it out to your own preferences.  Now that generic Avenger is Shepard's Avenger.  No other weapon in the galaxy is quite like it.  

Man I missed that in ME2.

There's a reason Zaeed named his gun.

[DaveExclamationMarkYognaut]

Mr. MannlyMan wrote...

DaveExclamationMarkYognaut wrote...

This is correct. Numbers =/= deep RPG gameplay - just look at Oblivion. Deep gameplay is the result of deep options, not hitting the other guys in the face with the biggest numbers you can find.

But Oblivion does have stats...

Open-world environments and non-linear quests don't have anything to do with stats. Saying "Deep gameplay is the result of deep options" is also pretty vague. So the only thing that should matter about weapons is their sound and their appearance? Everything else is determined by stats; damage, firing rate, recoil, etc... how would adding stats to define those values diminish the experience of picking/choosing weapons to use? Should players be forced to experiment or look those value up online to make their decision? 

Or maybe guns should all have the same damage, the same reload rate, etc.?

Oblivion has lots of numbers and unbelievably shallow combat. Look at RPGs with deep combat systems - The Spirit Engine 2, Witcher 2, Devil Survivor, argubably Dragon Age: Origins - those games are deep because they give you actual options in combat (viable spells that do things other than DPS, actual crowd control, positioning, viable defensive options, party roles, traps, swappable team members, stuff like that) not because they let you swap out your pants for slightly better pants.

The point is "changes in sound and appearance" is not "deep options." Neither is the ability to switch out a gun for a strictly better version of the same gun. Deep shooter options are the kind of thing you see in games like CoD, Battlefield, or Team Fortress 2 - guns and equipment that actually change your playstyle. Combine that with the sort of deep options that RPGs provide and you have a combat system for Mass Effect 3 that has actual depth, all without the need to loot/buy guns with slightly bigger numbers than the guns you already have.

[clopin]

I agree. If I wanted a stat-based, loot whoring game, then I would buy Diablo.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

I so agree with Casey there. Focus on story progression please and leave everything else "rpgish" second hand please. I hate having to ****in' manage my weight and so much stuff my character carries sometimes, god knows I hate it. Stats, well, I like them, but I'd like my Shepard's accuracy being my...accuracy. I have never played rpgs for it.

[Jaron Oberyn]

It seems that the only thing he can actually say he accomplished in ME2 from that statement is
"combat". There was no exploration in Me2's linear level design, an extremely short main plot or otherwise useless story given the fact that they all left you in ME3, and hardly any real character progression unless you count do a loyalty mission, hit a to progress through only conversation choice, and repeat the same dialogue sequence for the rest of the game. But they nailed combat pretty good. That's what matters right?

-Polite

[Darji]

Ok first of all. If they want to make a game with deeper RPG mechanics. The combat needs to be stats based. Otherwise its only a shooter. Secondly as far as the characterdriven story goes. Yes it would be great but the story in ME2 was not characterdriven, or complex, or even good. IT basicly was guy saves world but before that he recruits some guys with almost no personalty or deep character developement. Another thing is the features that bioware tries to hype alot with their games. And this is that your choices matter and that there will be consequences.

And this is the point where they really fail. Not one of your choices really mattered. Especially in ME2. The only thing that mattered was that you have to do their companion quest in order to let them survive. All the other stuff doesnt matter and it wont matter in ME3 either. Besides some Cameos. Which is really really sad. Why cant they do it like Alpha protocol. In this game the whole plot and also the settings will chance according to your choices.

Its great to say that a deep "RPG" needs a good character driven story but if you cant even do that and still try to convince people. Then something terrible went wrong in the developement.

[DaveExclamationMarkYognaut]

Darji wrote...

Ok first of all. If they want to make a game with deeper RPG mechanics. The combat needs to be stats based. Otherwise its only a shooter.

Your average brown/bloom/gritty/cover-based/modern fps is actually as much or more stat-driven than your average RPG. http://denkirson.xan.../bad-company-2/

Darji wrote...

Secondly as far as the characterdriven story goes. Yes it would be great but the story in ME2 was not characterdriven, or complex, or even good. IT basicly was guy saves world but before that he recruits some guys with almost no personalty or deep character developement. Another thing is the features that bioware tries to hype alot with their games. And this is that your choices matter and that there will be consequences.

And this is the point where they really fail. Not one of your choices really mattered. Especially in ME2. The only thing that mattered was that you have to do their companion quest in order to let them survive. All the other stuff doesnt matter and it wont matter in ME3 either. Besides some Cameos. Which is really really sad. Why cant they do it like Alpha protocol. In this game the whole plot and also the settings will chance according to your choices.

Its great to say that a deep "RPG" needs a good character driven story but if you cant even do that and still try to convince people. Then something terrible went wrong in the developement.

This I have no argument with. Witcher 2 and Deus Ex 3 will have set the bar for ME3 story-wise, so Bioware needs to step up their game. However, they do achieve that level of storytelling sporadically in ME2  - if every part of ME3 is as good as legion's or mordin's loyalty mission I don't think I'll have any complaints in that department.

Modifié par DaveExclamationMarkYognaut, 30 juin 2011 - 11:35 .

[Medhia Nox]

I'll focus on "good character driven story and good progression".

Forget combat - I can "combat" in any game - I want approx. 50% less of it in all future Bioware titles.

But I don't need stats and loot to make up for it (especially if loot only enhances the combat)

Give me more story.

[Terror_K]

It is kind of annoying how BioWare's definition of "RPG elements" not only differs from my own (to a certain degree), but also what their own definition used to be a few years ago (which was more in line with my own). It's like they've changed their own definition to suit themselves lately, and it's kind of frustrating that what they considered important now isn't the same as they did back in the day. Sure, what they emphasize now (essentially story-driven stuff and choices, etc.) was always important and always part of their overall style, but it's narrowed down to only those aspects rather than the overall RPG package.

If one looks at an RPG as having two sides: the roleplaying side and the statistical side, then while before BioWare focused on both equally before they've now twisted their focus almost entirely to the former and neglected the latter, largely I believe because these factors (if too heavy) put off a lot of today's modern gamers. It's all well and good to say that they've admitted to ME2 not having enough of these factors and that in ME3 they're improving somewhat, but they really shouldn't have suffered as much as they did in ME2 in the first place, IMO. I'm still happy more customisation and deeper RPG elements are making a return, and thank the dev team for that, but that doesn't take away from the fact that ME2 was a massive disappointment in this regard. And I've yet to see a satisfactory answer from the team as to why this was. In fact, most answers point to a very unsatisfactory answer.

This said, I really don't like it when they seem to treat the more statistical RPG elements I love as if they're some embarrassing, dirty thing that causes a nasty rash or something. It's like they're ashamed of using them in their past titles the way they talk sometimes, along with this whole aspect where they seem to want to put words in our mouths with what we want sometimes. Many of us asked for "more/better/stronger RPG elements" in ME3, but from the way they talk it's like they've just taken the comments at face value and put their own spin on what we want rather than really reading what we want. That's not necessarily actually true, but the comments here in question indicate that this is the case.

Sometimes it kind of feels like that episode of The Simpsons where they went to Australia and Marge was asking the bartender for coffee, but he kept acting like she was asking for beer, no matter how much she indicated otherwise:

ME: I want more RPG elements.
DEV: So richer story, characters and narrative, with real choices and consequences.
ME: Well, yeah. But what I meant was more statistical stuff and better customisation. I mean the actual mechanics and ruleset of the roleplaying system, etc.
DEV: So richer story, characters and narrative, with real choices and consequences.
ME: No. Statistical, mechanical stuff.
DEV: Story, choices and consequences.
ME: Stats.
DEV: Narrative.
ME: S. T...
DEV: N. A...