3223 réponses à ce sujet

[Terror_K]

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm not sure if it's your ideas or just your writing that's muddled up. Sure, RPG fans are a majority of the fanbase. And yet these same RPG fans seem to have preferred ME2's gameplay by a pretty wide margin. Or are you saying that the professional reviews, user revieews, and sales figures are all lying, and lying in the same direction?

You seem to be confusing "fanbase" with "playerbase" here. There's a difference between fans of the game and the total amount of people who merely play it. I wouldn't really call all those people, for instance, who never even finished ME2 part of the "fanbase" of Mass Effect. Not much of a fan when you can't finish the game even once, and according to BioWare's stats that was about half of the people whose stats they tracked. Players who pick it up and whizz through it in a few days, then trade it in for the next "big thing" and don't think much about it beyond that except maybe picking up the sequel when it comes out in the sea of other games they regard just as equally aren't exactly "fanbase" material either.

So all in all, given how divided these forums are, I wouldn't say the vast majority of the fanbase preferred ME2's gameplay by a "pretty wide margin" at all. Just the overall playerbase. And I don't see why BioWare should design their games more for casual players who don't really love the game any more than the other games they play (in fact, probably less) over those who really loved the original and fell in love with the IP. And I feel this is BioWare's problem overall lately as a whole: they've been making their games more to bring in new fans than to appeal to the existing ones. DA2's massive art design changes were a classic example of this: a good majority of fans were happy with the Dragon Age's visual style, but they did it because a bunch of reviewers and casual players complained that it looked too generic and Tolkien-esque. It's pathetic.

littlezack wrote...

Exactly. I'm no marine, but if I picked up a sniper rifle, I think I'd at least be able to hit a non-moving target without my gun wobbling all over the place.

Yes, because simply being able to pick up a sniper rifle means you're automatically an expert sniper. You'll be able to hit any target dead-on by just putting the reticule on their heads without having to factor in distance, bullet-drop, curvature of the Earth (or other planets in ME's case), wind direction and speed, wind resistence, etc.

AlanC9 wrote...

But is anyone else making hybrids like ME2? There damn well aren't twenty of those a year.

You're joking, right? Pretty much every game these days is a hybrid. 90% of the AAA titles out there are all essentially the same: these gritty story-driven, action-oriented affairs with mild RPG and customisation elements. This is the age of the hybrid, and it's making gaming generic. One of the biggest reasons for my dislike of the direction ME2 and DA2 both took was because they're slipping away from their RPG roots and just becoming closer to the same generic drivel being pumped out by everybody else. Genres and games as a whole are losing their identities as every publisher and developer keeps trying to find this perfect hybrid game for the mainstream gamer to try and nab as many sales and as big an audience as possible.

Modifié par Terror_K, 04 juillet 2011 - 01:24 .

[TheKillerAngel]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Bnol wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

An RPG is defined by Character based skill,  you're taking on a Role,  you have to have a Character to do so,  the Character must be defined independent of you and your skills or you're just doing self-insertion.

So your definition of an RPG is only turn-based combat.  Good to know, I guess few games qualify as an RPG to you.

Where did he say turn based combat? I don't get how you people conjure up a response to something that's not there at all.

Edit: I've got to agree with Gatt, ME2 is not a hybrid, it's a pure shooter. If you consider it an RPG, then you must also consider Assassins Creed an RPG.

-Polite

Turn based combat is the logical end result of what Gatt9 describes because it removes the player's direct control over the combat actions of the character and instead hands it to stat and number crunching of the computer.

[fenix612]

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.

You sir, have won the internet. Agreed 100%

[Warkupo]

RPG's are all about playing with a spread sheet, and politely taking turns between striking the opponent. Casey obviously has no idea what he's talking about.

[this isnt my name]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Bnol wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

An RPG is defined by Character based skill,  you're taking on a Role,  you have to have a Character to do so,  the Character must be defined independent of you and your skills or you're just doing self-insertion.

So your definition of an RPG is only turn-based combat.  Good to know, I guess few games qualify as an RPG to you.

Where did he say turn based combat? I don't get how you people conjure up a response to something that's not there at all.

Edit: I've got to agree with Gatt, ME2 is not a hybrid, it's a pure shooter. If you consider it an RPG, then you must also consider Assassins Creed an RPG.

-Polite

I agree with Gatt and polite.

Savber100 wrote...

It's hilarious how moronic people can
get when they can't understand that a game can be GREAT even if it's not
close to their tastes.

Mass Effect 2 sold over 2 million in THE FIRST WEEK, Check all the major sites and that's the number you'll get.

Oh no, it must be rigged! That will totally ruin the argument I just put out! What can I say!?

Ah
yes, it was rigged. Bioware/EA must have bought this people out and now
I'll start pulling random numbers from my arse to support my claim!

It's really facepalm worthy... Do any of you guys that say this stuff actually work in the industry?

Numbers mean nothing when it comes to quality. People should know that considering the numbers CoD sells yearly.  Its facepalm worthy you think numbers reflect quality. Another example, DA2 sold more games than DAO initially, its still a terrible game. What about games people love like psychonaughts or beyond good and evil ? They didnt sell X million on release so they suck ? Fail logic is fail.

[fenix612]

Make your own genre, Role Playing Action Adventure game. RPAA


Problem solved.

[littlezack]

 

iAlanC9 wrote...

But is anyone else making hybrids like ME2? There damn well aren't twenty of those a year.

You're joking, right? Pretty much every game these days is a hybrid. 90% of the AAA titles out there are all essentially the same: these gritty story-driven, action-oriented affairs with mild RPG and customisation elements. This is the age of the hybrid, and it's making gaming generic. One of the biggest reasons for my dislike of the direction ME2 and DA2 both took was because they're slipping away from their RPG roots and just becoming closer to the same generic drivel being pumped out by everybody else. Genres and games as a whole are losing their identities as every publisher and developer keeps trying to find this perfect hybrid game for the mainstream gamer to try and nab as many sales and as big an audience as poss

I'm fairly certain the keyword in Alan's statement is 'like ME2'? Are there many shooters out there? Sure. Do some of them try to mix in RPG elements? Sure. Do any of them go to the extent that ME does? Not really. The only game that I would really compare to Mass Effect is Alpha Protocol, and that's...well, yeah.

[Terror_K]

this isnt my name wrote...

Numbers mean nothing when it comes to quality. People should know that considering the numbers CoD sells yearly.  Its facepalm worthy you think numbers reflect quality. Another example, DA2 sold more games than DAO initially, its still a terrible game. What about games people love like psychonaughts or beyond good and evil ? They didnt sell X million on release so they suck ? Fail logic is fail.

Exactly. Once again we have the irony of a bunch of us saying, "ME2 was dumbed down for the masses" and a bunch of people going, "But ME2 was more popular and liked by more people!"

Well, duh! That's what happens when you cater a game FOR THE MASSES! <_<

[JayhartRIC]

TheKillerAngel wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Bnol wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

An RPG is defined by Character based skill,  you're taking on a Role,  you have to have a Character to do so,  the Character must be defined independent of you and your skills or you're just doing self-insertion.

So your definition of an RPG is only turn-based combat.  Good to know, I guess few games qualify as an RPG to you.

Where did he say turn based combat? I don't get how you people conjure up a response to something that's not there at all.

Edit: I've got to agree with Gatt, ME2 is not a hybrid, it's a pure shooter. If you consider it an RPG, then you must also consider Assassins Creed an RPG.

-Polite

Turn based combat is the logical end result of what Gatt9 describes because it removes the player's direct control over the combat actions of the character and instead hands it to stat and number crunching of the computer.

Really it's the only end result.  The moment you make the combat realtime, player skill has to come into play.  That was the case in ME1 as well.  ME1 was a hybrid that didn't really do good at either statistical gameplay or shooter gameplay.  It was just held up by a great story and characters.  What separated ME from other games is the cinematic dialogue with full voice acting and having your decisions matter across multiple games.  ME2 improved on this with interrupts and improved shooter gameplay.  Statistical gameplay took a hit, but it was so bad in ME1 that I didn't miss it.

[littlezack]

[quote]Terror_K wrote...


[quote]littlezack wrote...

Exactly. I'm no marine, but if I picked up a sniper rifle, I think I'd at least be able to hit a non-moving target without my gun wobbling all over the place.[/quote]

Yes, because simply being able to pick up a sniper rifle means you're automatically an expert sniper. You'll be able to hit any target dead-on by just putting the reticule on their heads without having to factor in distance, bullet-drop, curvature of the Earth (or other planets in ME's case), wind direction and speed, wind resistence, etc.

An expert? No. But I could at least aim the damn thing without it swinging all over the place like I'm drunk. And as I said - I'm no marine, but Shepard is. 

[this isnt my name]

TheKillerAngel wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Bnol wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

An RPG is defined by Character based skill,  you're taking on a Role,  you have to have a Character to do so,  the Character must be defined independent of you and your skills or you're just doing self-insertion.

So your definition of an RPG is only turn-based combat.  Good to know, I guess few games qualify as an RPG to you.

Where did he say turn based combat? I don't get how you people conjure up a response to something that's not there at all.

Edit: I've got to agree with Gatt, ME2 is not a hybrid, it's a pure shooter. If you consider it an RPG, then you must also consider Assassins Creed an RPG.

-Polite

Turn based combat is the logical end result of what Gatt9 describes because it removes the player's direct control over the combat actions of the character and instead hands it to stat and number crunching of the computer.

Not really. I played fallout new vegas as a sniper, if you just gave him a knife he would die. Fast.
My other character was a tribal. I couldnt snipe with him, aside from aim being off, it was also patheticly weak.

My characters were under my control, but stats played a very big part in thier abilities/options/playstyle.

Another exaple would be alpha protocal, not turn based yet its controled by stats. Your argument dosent work.

[JayhartRIC]

littlezack wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

littlezack wrote...

Exactly. I'm no marine, but if I picked up a sniper rifle, I think I'd at least be able to hit a non-moving target without my gun wobbling all over the place.

Yes, because simply being able to pick up a sniper rifle means you're automatically an expert sniper. You'll be able to hit any target dead-on by just putting the reticule on their heads without having to factor in distance, bullet-drop, curvature of the Earth (or other planets in ME's case), wind direction and speed, wind resistence, etc.

An expert? No. But I could at least aim the damn thing without it swinging all over the place like I'm drunk. And as I said - I'm no marine, but Shepard is. 

They have a scope in existence NOW  that automatically factors in wind resistance, elevation, etc., and tells you exactly where to shoot.  I think ME2 did a good job of mixing character skills(powers like Adrenaline Rush/Sniper Slowdown) with player skill.

Modifié par JayhartRIC, 04 juillet 2011 - 01:48 .

[Terror_K]

KaidanWilliamsShepard wrote...

Drew left, and one of the lead female game designers just left also. Significant turnover.

Yeah... but the latter case was somebody who, judging from interviews and quotes, was largely responsible for ME2's problems.

littlezack wrote...

I'm fairly certain the keyword in Alan's statement is 'like ME2'? Are there many shooters out there? Sure. Do some of them try to mix in RPG elements? Sure. Do any of them go to the extent that ME does? Not really. The only game that I would really compare to Mass Effect is Alpha Protocol, and that's...well, yeah.

A better RPG than ME2 was, even if it wasn't technically a better game and had flaws and bugs. ME2 could still learn a lot from how it did its skill system and even minigames. The RPG aspects of Alpha Protocol were far superior to that of ME2's, it was the core gameplay that let AP down, along with bugs and a few broken systems. Heck, it even had more meaningful choices and better emails! And even then most of the reviews I've seen of AP indicate strongly to me that most of the reviewers were playing it wrong and were playing it as if it was supposed to play like Gears of War, Army of Two and ME2 just because it had TPS combat. While you could try, AP played best as a stealth game.

In either case, that's just getting down to the nitty gritty. ME2 and BioWare are doing the same things as every other developer, but they're just coming in from the opposite side: while other devs are taking action titles and adding RPG, customisation, story and choice elements, BioWare are taking their RPGs and adding more action ones while stripping out some of the more hardcore RPG ones.

Modifié par Terror_K, 04 juillet 2011 - 01:45 .

[Warkupo]

Personally I hate it when RPG elements decide my head shot didn't count because I didn't put any skills into my Sniper Rifle. Apparently the gun was dependent upon my SOUL, and not, you know, physics.

[littlezack]

Alpha Protocol is just proof that having heavy-as-hell RPG elements does not a good game make. You have to have solid gameplay to back it up, and I feel ME2 succeeds because of that. I will agree that Alpha Protocol did do a few things right, though. The choices are more immediately meaningful, but that's because Alpha Protocol only has one game to show them through. ME is supposed to show them over three games, and the whole payoff will come through with 3.

[this isnt my name]

Terror_K wrote...

KaidanWilliamsShepard wrote...

Drew left, and one of the lead female game designers just left also. Significant turnover.

Yeah... but the latter case was somebody who, judging from interviews and quotes, was largely responsible for ME2's problems.

littlezack wrote...

I'm fairly certain the keyword in Alan's statement is 'like ME2'? Are there many shooters out there? Sure. Do some of them try to mix in RPG elements? Sure. Do any of them go to the extent that ME does? Not really. The only game that I would really compare to Mass Effect is Alpha Protocol, and that's...well, yeah.

A better RPG than ME2 was, even if it wasn't technically a better game and had flaws and bugs. ME2 could still learn a lot from how it did its skill system and even minigames. The RPG aspects of Alpha Protocol were far superior to that of ME2's, it was the core gameplay that let AP down, along with bugs and a few broken systems. Heck, it even had more meaningful choices and better emails! And even then most of the reviews I've seen of AP indicate strongly to me that most of the reviewers were playing it wrong and were playing it as if it was supposed to play like Gears of War, Army of Two and ME2 just because it had TPS combat. While you could try, AP played best as a stealth game.

In either case, that's just getting down to the nitty gritty. ME2 and BioWare are doing the same things as every other developer, but they're just coming in from the opposite side: while other devs are taking action titles and adding RPG, customisation, story and choice elements, BioWare are taking their RPGs and adding more action ones while stripping out some of the more hardcore RPG ones.

Drew left ? I though he got moved to something else ? Damn. I know one of the DA devs quit becuase of what dragon age became.

Yes they played it wron, you wont even have to look far into this vid
www.youtube.com/watch

Its funny ME treis to talk about impact, but the council dying seems to chagne very little in game, yet AP a game with less funding (I assume) or the witcher 2 (I assume less funding again becuase BW has EAs support).

I agree CoD adds the perk things, like commando, danger close, etc. But here BW is adding more shooter elements. Eventually the only difference will be looks <_<

[Lunatic LK47]

Terror_K wrote...

A better RPG than ME2 was, even if it wasn't technically a better game and had flaws and bugs. ME2 could still learn a lot from how it did its skill system and even minigames. The RPG aspects of Alpha Protocol were far superior to that of ME2's, it was the core gameplay that let AP down, along with bugs and a few broken systems. Heck, it even had more meaningful choices and better emails! And even then most of the reviews I've seen of AP indicate strongly to me that most of the reviewers were playing it wrong and were playing it as if it was supposed to play like Gears of War, Army of Two and ME2 just because it had TPS combat. While you could try, AP played best as a stealth game.

Stealth game my ass. "Ghosting" was only possible for five or six missions tops while the rest of the game made it mandatory for you to enter firefights or boss-fights. For a game that preached "choice is your weapon," 2/3rds of your playstyle are outright invalidated due to ****ty design. "Play a shooter Thorton" Oops, you have **** controls. "Play Splinter Cell Thorton" Oops, you can only sneak through 6 out of 15+ missions, and you're required to use Chain shot just to beat a boss or participate in a firefight just because the plot dictates it. Play "Gadget Thorton" Oh, sorry, you're only allowed to carry six gadgets at most, and bosses are immune to the gadgets.

[Dangerfoot]

this isnt my name wrote...

Not really. I played fallout new vegas as a sniper, if you just gave him a knife he would die. Fast.
My other character was a tribal. I couldnt snipe with him, aside from aim being off, it was also patheticly weak.

My characters were under my control, but stats played a very big part in thier abilities/options/playstyle.

This.

[Storm Vermin]

Gatt9 wrote...

An RPG is defined by Character based skill,  you're taking on a Role,  you have to have a Character to do so,  the Character must be defined independent of you and your skills or you're just doing self-insertion.

So, essentially, the game must play itself in order to be considered an RPG? Let's say you want your character(s) to use a certain tactic in combat. My, but you are using your skills and not the character's to do it! Also, it seems to me that you don't want to make any choices in a game. I mean, if you don't want to risk making a character a self-insert, he must act independently of your wishes all the time. Which is sort of strange, because you complain that the choices in ME2 are not visible enough. 

I agree that neither ME game can be considered a pure RPG, and really, action game with RPG elements would be more suitable name, but really, the definition of a RPG you give is sort of strange. Or maybe I just can't understand it.

[Praetor Knight]

Terror_K wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm not sure if it's your ideas or just your writing that's muddled up. Sure, RPG fans are a majority of the fanbase. And yet these same RPG fans seem to have preferred ME2's gameplay by a pretty wide margin. Or are you saying that the professional reviews, user revieews, and sales figures are all lying, and lying in the same direction?

You seem to be confusing "fanbase" with "playerbase" here. There's a difference between fans of the game and the total amount of people who merely play it. I wouldn't really call all those people, for instance, who never even finished ME2 part of the "fanbase" of Mass Effect. Not much of a fan when you can't finish the game even once, and according to BioWare's stats that was about half of the people whose stats they tracked. Players who pick it up and whizz through it in a few days, then trade it in for the next "big thing" and don't think much about it beyond that except maybe picking up the sequel when it comes out in the sea of other games they regard just as equally aren't exactly "fanbase" material either.

So all in all, given how divided these forums are, I wouldn't say the vast majority of the fanbase preferred ME2's gameplay by a "pretty wide margin" at all. Just the overall playerbase. And I don't see why BioWare should design their games more for casual players who don't really love the game any more than the other games they play (in fact, probably less) over those who really loved the original and fell in love with the IP. And I feel this is BioWare's problem overall lately as a whole: they've been making their games more to bring in new fans than to appeal to the existing ones.

Well, I've got a poll about gameplay and I've seen a few other polls that seem to point to many on these forums preferring ME2 gameplay over ME1, so I'm getting a sense that the fanbase / playerbase stuff is simply splitting hairs, IMHO. (Here's my poll: http://social.biowar...64/polls/13038/)

I can't comment on the DA2 stuff cuz I don't have a copy of the game, but isn't there separate dev teams working on the two games / IPs? So I don't think that there is a fair comparison there, with such statements / positions.


And with what I've seen in the Known Features thread and other sources, ME3 will have more for players than ME2 so I wouldn't write Bioware off and label them prematurely as ignoring the original fanbase (which I like to think I'm a part of since I like the first game too).

And I'd rather believe they are doing their best to make the best game possible, regardless of labels like RPG, TPS and any other label / category that we can think of. But if we want a label I submit this potential candidate for consideration: iconoclast.

Modifié par Praetor Shepard, 04 juillet 2011 - 02:03 .

[littlezack]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

A better RPG than ME2 was, even if it wasn't technically a better game and had flaws and bugs. ME2 could still learn a lot from how it did its skill system and even minigames. The RPG aspects of Alpha Protocol were far superior to that of ME2's, it was the core gameplay that let AP down, along with bugs and a few broken systems. Heck, it even had more meaningful choices and better emails! And even then most of the reviews I've seen of AP indicate strongly to me that most of the reviewers were playing it wrong and were playing it as if it was supposed to play like Gears of War, Army of Two and ME2 just because it had TPS combat. While you could try, AP played best as a stealth game.

Stealth game my ass. "Ghosting" was only possible for five or six missions tops while the rest of the game made it mandatory for you to enter firefights or boss-fights. For a game that preached "choice is your weapon," 2/3rds of your playstyle are outright invalidated due to ****ty design. "Play a shooter Thorton" Oops, you have **** controls. "Play Splinter Cell Thorton" Oops, you can only sneak through 6 out of 15+ missions, and you're required to use Chain shot just to beat a boss or participate in a firefight just because the plot dictates it. Play "Gadget Thorton" Oh, sorry, you're only allowed to carry six gadgets at most, and bosses are immune to the gadgets.

Honestly, all you really need is Chain Shot, a good pistol, and a lot of bullets.