310 réponses à ce sujet

[Captain Kibosh]

Il Divo wrote...

KaidanWilliamsShepard wrote...

I have been playing GTA IV...and ME1 is a gem when it comes to smooth character and gun controls compared to at least that. When it comes to character controls when doing things as simple as walking, i actualy found Mass Effect 2s Shepard harder to control...just a bit more Wobbley.

Admittedly, I haven't played GTA IV, so I can't really comment on that. I did play III/Vice City and the controls there did feel awkward as well.

I would consider the pure "Epicness" of the first games story pretty innovative.

But the epic story doesn't make Mass Effect innovative; it makes it a good story. Every game with good features are not by necessity considered innovative. Ex: If people praise Modern Warfare 2's gameplay, that doesn't mean the gameplay is suddenly 'innovative'. And it isn't, given the similarities to MW1.

Or are you using epic in a different sense?

I think we have to be careful about how we define "gameplay."  Could narrative be considered a gaming mechanic alongside combat & movement mechanics, inventory/resource management, leveling, and other kinds of interactivity (dialogue trees, navigation, puzzle-solving, etc.)?  I guess I'm looking at the word "gameplay" as "interactive features in service of the player's gaming experience."

Given that, should we define narrative as a separate and distinct entity from gameplay?  When it comes to the specific case of the ME games, I think it's a hazy distinction, especially since dialogue, a gameplay mechanic (given the dialogue tree mechanic) does so much to convey the story.  Furthermore, the player's story can change depending on his/her choices, so that is indeed a huge level of interactivity.

Anyway, to bring it back to the original question of this thread, I am going to take my cue from the poet T.S. Eliot:

Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what
they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least
something different.

Substitute "poet" with "game developer" to make it relevant to this thread.  The point is, there really is nothing new under the sun in terms of human creative works, it's all been said and done before, it's only the way you synthesize and transform pre-existing material that determines the worth of a given artistic endeavor.

In Bioware's case, I think they've done a fine job of taking inspiration from multiple sources.  And as far as taking too much from shooters, I'm not worried about that at all so long as ALL the aspects of ME 3 are ultimately in service to a compelling narrative.

Modifié par Captain Kibosh, 27 juillet 2011 - 06:42 .

[Eurhetemec]

Captain Kibosh wrote...

Anyway, to bring it back to the original question of this thread, I am going to take my cue from the poet T.S. Eliot:

Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what
they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least
something different.

Substitute "poet" with "game developer" to make it relevant to this thread.  The point is, there really is nothing new under the sun in terms of human creative works, it's all been said and done before, it's only the way you synthesize and transform pre-existing material that determines the worth of a given artistic endeavor.

In Bioware's case, I think they've done a fine job of taking inspiration from multiple sources.  And as far as taking too much from shooters, I'm not worried about that at all so long as ALL the aspects of ME 3 are ultimately in service to a compelling narrative.

What Elliott said is very apt here. BioWare have shown with the ME games that they're clearly "good poets" in this instance, much as with DA2 they might have shown more of "bad poet" angle.

[Il Divo]

Captain Kibosh wrote...

I think we have to be careful about how we define "gameplay."  Could narrative be considered a gaming mechanic alongside combat & movement mechanics, inventory/resource management, leveling, and other kinds of interactivity (dialogue trees, navigation, puzzle-solving, etc.)?  I guess I'm looking at the word "gameplay" as "interactive features in service of the player's gaming experience."

Narrative itself? Never. Interactive narrative? I would agree on this. Almost every video game features narrative, but what turns dialogue into a gameplay feature is that you are now participating, which is why it can be looked at as an aspect of gameplay. But I don't think that's what the poster was referring to. The "epicness" of Mass Effect's story still doesn't  make it innovative. It's simply a good story and well-told. Essentially, good and innovative are not synonymous.
 

Given that, should we define narrative as a separate and distinct entity from gameplay?  When it comes to the specific case of the ME games, I think it's a hazy distinction, especially since dialogue, a gameplay mechanic (given the dialogue tree mechanic) does so much to convey the story.  Furthermore, the player's story can change depending on his/her choices, so that is indeed a huge level of interactivity.

True, but that alone still wouldn't make Mass Effect innovative in terms of interaction. Even before ME, we've had games which featured similar (if not greater) levels of choice, dialogue, and interactivity. What ME (and its sequel) brings to the table which I would consider innovative would be the much heavier emphasis on cinematic presentation.

Modifié par Il Divo, 27 juillet 2011 - 07:45 .

[Captain Kibosh]

Il Divo wrote...

True, but that alone still wouldn't make Mass Effect innovative in terms of interaction. Even before ME, we've had games which featured similar (if not greater) levels of choice, dialogue, and interactivity. What ME (and its sequel) brings to the table which I would consider innovative would be the much heavier emphasis on cinematic presentation.

Well, there was BW's decision to make the dialogue trees representational, versus literal, when choosing dialogue options.  Had someone done that before?  Was it done it KoToR, I don't honestly recall.

Anyway, I thought it was a great idea in terms of keeping the narrative fresh, because the player didn't have an exact play-by-play of what his/her main character was going to utter.

[Rockworm503]

 The way I see it.  Mass Effect was always a Third Person Shooter RPG if they can improve on the shooter bits AND the RPG than its a win in my book.

[Captain Kibosh]

@ Il Divo

By the by, I think I agree with your distinction between narrative and interactive narrative, especially if I'm to follow my own definition of gameplay.

[Rockworm503]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

LilyasAvalon wrote...

At a glance, yes, but at least it's not a total and complete rip off. Let's face it, in today's society, there's NOTHING original about ANYTHING. Everyone's a thief deep down, they've stolen something from someone. My literature teacher taught me that.

Don't think of it as stealing, but more as inspiration. Every artist looks to other artists for inspiration. It is great for getting new ideas on something or if you're out of ideas. 

-Polite

If it sucks then they stole it from someone else
If its good then they got inspiration from it.

[AlanC9]

Captain Kibosh wrote...
Well, there was BW's decision to make the dialogue trees representational, versus literal, when choosing dialogue options.  Had someone done that before?  Was it done it KoToR, I don't honestly recall.

I believe the technique was first used in Wing Commander 3 back in 1994. Though there were only two choices per dialogue node there. They couldn't have fit any more with FMV -- as it was some stuff didn't fit on the 4 CDs.

[AlanC9]

Rockworm503 wrote...
If it sucks then they stole it from someone else
If its good then they got inspiration from it.

I'm going to steal these lines in the future. Er.... I mean, be inspired by them.

[Malsumis]

this isnt my name wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Eurhetemec wrote...

A good example of how adding randomness in an already-complex game is bad can be found in Alpha Protocol - the first game to try to "rip off" the Mass Effect formula, and it was disasterously bad.

We'll have to disagree here. I bought Alpha Protocol on a sale because of all the flak it had gotten, but when I actually got it and played it I felt it was just as good an experience, if not better, than the ME series. Some of the areas it even pushed innovation where ME series still felt stale.

What Alpha Protocol lacked was post launch patching to fix the flaws and bugs it had (I don't think it got any patches at all, to fix any of the issues it had). As a game design, though, it was a gem marred by a hurried production schedule.

I bought AP on sale. It was superior to ME1 in terms of gameplay imo.
Timed dialouge felt better than the wheel, guns were done better, ME gun powers didnt do much for me, here chain shot was useful, and they had different effects e.g shotgun charged gives a knockdown, while AR is increased aim.
It had more ways to play, stealth, shooting, setting traps and dialouge. ME1 didnt have as much flexibility with playstyle. The choices damn I didnt even think how much effect some of them would have or even that they would be referenced. I findit odd people can hate alpha protocal, but like mass effect 1, when AP is superior, most of it may be oppinion but choice and consequence is amazing. It should have got atleast an 8. As for bugs 2 in an entire playthrough. AI just needs work and they fix bossfights it wouldhavebeen a 9.5.

Story dosent have any good twists though. Except 1 I found so far, but its only a certain ending.

AP was a considerably average game. It's characters, story and the great use of choice made up for terrible level design, boring combat. terrible encouter/enemy design, bugs and poor presentation. Mass Effect as a whole package is superior.

The only things bio should look at in AP, is the way it handled choice. Bio is very good a giving the illusion of choice, but's it's just that, an illusion, quite often it has no impact. AP was excellent at providing choices that effected the game. Also the way it handled character interaction, everyone was effected by stances(dialogue choice) differently, it was more evolved then renegade/paragon choice system.

[Destroy Raiden_]

An obvious shooter moment for me was the whole climb ontop of the van and shoot with this big gun at the reaper that so screamed typical shooter for me and was alittle annoying but I more then likely just shrug it off and kill the darn thing w/o too much of a my game is wrecked because of this moment. The scene alittle impractical sense no one in their right mind would hang out unprotected on the back of a car while reapers give chase but it'll do I mean what else could they've done with that scene anyway? I just hope we don't encounter too many moments like this that was one of the reasons why 2 was a large turn off too shooter orientated and less rpg and story orientated.

[Homebound]

shooters in general have plateaued. Id be surprised if anyone has anything new to put forward in the next decade or two.

[Schneidend]

There is nothing new under the sun.

Guns have been in a game before. They're cliche. No game should ever have guns again.

[MajorStranger]

KaidanWilliamsShepard wrote...

Heavy Turret: Always been proved useful both in real life and in video game
Holo-sword: Dumb
Combat shield: Really useful, can see heavy riot shield strong enough to withstand heavy fire in the future.
Mecha: Has both psychological and fighting effect in a fight.
Sliding: Nothing out of the ordinary.
Douchebags: I agree let Activision take the douche.

[TexasToast712]

More Halo, GOW, and Battlefield, less COD in my Mass Effect please.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

I personally don't consider "catching up to the standard of modern shooters" to be the same as "taking inspiration from cliche shooters"

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 28 juillet 2011 - 03:49 .

[Il Divo]

Captain Kibosh wrote...

Well, there was BW's decision to make the dialogue trees representational, versus literal, when choosing dialogue options.  Had someone done that before?  Was it done it KoToR, I don't honestly recall.

Anyway, I thought it was a great idea in terms of keeping the narrative fresh, because the player didn't have an exact play-by-play of what his/her main character was going to utter.

I probably should've laid that out better. When I say "cinematic presentation", I usually include the dialogue wheel within that, since it places less emphasis on your PC's words, and more on the visual experience, hence 'more cinematic'. Apologies for not making that clear.

And I like your description of representational vs. literal, which is something I don't hear too often.

[Il Divo]

Captain Kibosh wrote...

@ Il Divo

By the by, I think I agree with your distinction between narrative and interactive narrative, especially if I'm to follow my own definition of gameplay.

Good to see I'm not alone. It's actually interesting how alot of gamers will refer to combat as "gameplay", but alot of the time do not make the same distinction during narrative. It makes me wonder what I'm doing during those sequences if not playing the game.

Ex: Planescape Torment is regarded as one of the greatest RPGs of all time, yet it's possible to play the game with a heavily dialogue-fueled character. Would we say that during all those moments of dialogue/interaction that I was not "playing the game"? I really doubt it. Gameplay is all about interaction, and in that sense I see Bioware conversations as also an aspect of gameplay.

Modifié par Il Divo, 28 juillet 2011 - 06:07 .

[Ahriman]

MajorStranger wrote...
Mecha: Has both psychological and fighting effect in a fight.

If mech is not remotely/VI controllable it's waste of money.

Sliding: Nothing out of the ordinary.

I'd prefer to see it only in mad [in a good meaning] shooters. I've heard about many combat tricks but sliding is not one of them.

[AlanC9]

Quicktime event? Really? Not ordinary animation?

Modifié par AlanC9, 28 juillet 2011 - 03:39 .

[Epic777]

Unfortunately the ME series has always been a product of two genres: TPS and RPG. Both of which are not forerunners in innovation

[AlanC9]

KaidanWilliamsShepard wrote...

Are you being sarcastic?
Well, when the game takes control, and forces you to fall off the side of a destroyed building in a stylish fashion, thats a quicktime event.

No, it isn't. Quicktime is a specific technology. Words have meanings, you know. You shouldn't use ones you don't understand.

Unless Bio really is using Quicktime, but I've never heard that they are.

Edit: my bad, KWC. I hadn't realized gamers were using the term that way. Looks like the Japanese are to blame.

Modifié par AlanC9, 28 juillet 2011 - 03:43 .