147 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

NovinhaShepard wrote...

I consider myself a 'core fan' Perhaps late to the game, starting with Jade Empire, and not a fan since BG, but that's irrelevant. If Bioware produces games that are not hard-core, traditional rpgs once in awhile, it doesn't bother me in the least. It's nice to change it up once in awhile.

And this. This times ten.

[Savber100]

Il Divo wrote...

NovinhaShepard wrote...

I consider myself a 'core fan' Perhaps late to the game, starting with Jade Empire, and not a fan since BG, but that's irrelevant. If Bioware produces games that are not hard-core, traditional rpgs once in awhile, it doesn't bother me in the least. It's nice to change it up once in awhile.

And this. This times ten.

And I'm fine with that as well. However, I would ask Bioware to use a different IP rather than simply doing a 180 with their current franchises like Dragon Age. D


Bioware should decide for each IP who they want to appeal and not on trying to always a strike a balance with each IP. Please one group with a IP focused especially on them and I swear all complaints will diminish by great margin. 

[JBONE27]

What's with all the DA2 hate? Other than the recycled dungeons and the fact that the love scenes were completely G rated, I loved it. In fact I preferred the plot, most of the characters (I didn't care for Anders or Fenris, but then again I never cared for Anders, and I didn't like anyone in the first game but Morrigan, Wynn, Leliana, Shale, and Alistar), and the gameplay to DA:O. It was rushed (though not as badly as Awakening, but it was fun and the plot was better. It was more politically driven, as opposed to the standard Bioware, "There's a big bad thing, and you have to collect stuff in order to destroy it," plot.
I know that that's a bit off topic, but it's really pissing me off.

[Dhiro]

I can't comment because I liked DA II, therefore I'm a filthy carebear

I'll go back to die while playing on casual and download mods that make Isabela white.

[Il Divo]

Savber100 wrote...

And I'm fine with that as well. However, I would ask Bioware to use a different IP rather than simply doing a 180 with their current franchises like Dragon Age. D


Bioware should decide for each IP who they want to appeal and not on trying to always a strike a balance with each IP. Please one group with a IP focused especially on them and I swear all complaints will diminish by great margin. 

Agreed as well. The issue we run into with DA2 (for myself at least) is that Origins was enjoyed as a return to the purist, old school style. By removing many these RPG elements, it's not clear what DA2 hoped to achieve.

In Mass Effect's case, it was a hybrid from the start, with lighter RPG elements than previous Bioware games and tps mechanics which didn't suit me. Hence why I'm comfortable with the changes.

Modifié par Il Divo, 08 août 2011 - 01:13 .

[Savber100]

JBONE27 wrote...

What's with all the DA2 hate? Other than the recycled dungeons and the fact that the love scenes were completely G rated, I loved it. In fact I preferred the plot, most of the characters (I didn't care for Anders or Fenris, but then again I never cared for Anders, and I didn't like anyone in the first game but Morrigan, Wynn, Leliana, Shale, and Alistar), and the gameplay to DA:O. It was rushed (though not as badly as Awakening, but it was fun and the plot was better. It was more politically driven, as opposed to the standard Bioware, "There's a big bad thing, and you have to collect stuff in order to destroy it," plot.
I know that that's a bit off topic, but it's really pissing me off.

I'll keep this short to not derail this thread but the reason for DA2's hate is because of what I stated above. If Bioware had started out with DA2 rather than Origins I bet you the rage wouldn't have been as bad. Why? Mainly because Bioware promised  a "spiritual succesor to Baldur's Gate 2" but then switched that tone for accessibility in DA2. The switch angered fans of what they thought was the beginning of a modern-gen Baldur's Gate. So yeah, DA2 wasn't bad, it was disappointing because of what people wanted after Origins. 

So as I said, Bioware should avoid this by focusing on who they want to appeal and STICK with it rather than always trying to find elusive balance of pleasing EVERYONE (which is just a recipe for mediocrity). 

[RPGamer13]

They simplified the skill system way too much if you ask me, you got more points in the first game and while you couldn't max everything out, you could do enough so as not to feel underpowered. On any of the difficulties I felt underpowered by the end of the game, yes even on the easiest.

The whole point of an RPG to me is to feel progress and feel like your characters are better equipped to take on the challenges ahead. I did not feel that at all with ME2, I felt like getting stronger was just to keep you from dying in one hit.

[Davie McG]

Il Divo wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

And I'm fine with that as well. However, I would ask Bioware to use a different IP rather than simply doing a 180 with their current franchises like Dragon Age. D


Bioware should decide for each IP who they want to appeal and not on trying to always a strike a balance with each IP. Please one group with a IP focused especially on them and I swear all complaints will diminish by great margin. 

Agreed as well. The issue we run into with DA2 (for myself at least) is that Origins was enjoyed as a return to the purist, old school style. By removing many these RPG elements, it's not clear what DA2 hoped to achieve.

In Mass Effect's case, it was a hybrid from the start, with lighter RPG elements than previous Bioware games and tps mechanics which didn't suit me. Hence why I'm comfortable with the changes.

I agree.

Although there were many changes in ME2 you didn't loose that much functionality. Weapon mods became weapon powers, instead of finding armour in random lockers you bought them from a shop. There were big changes like swaping out planet exploration for planet scanning, although I was a bit dissapointed with that I wouldn't call it a big RPG element.

We lost variety to an extent with squad customisation and we lost a bit of immersion with the inclusion of more loading screens. These two look like they are going to be addressed in 3, so I really don't see why people are so worried when if anything ME3 is going to be more like 1 than it was 2 only with an alteritive more immersive way of handling the inventory via shops and workbenches and a much needed improvement on combat. Also expanding more on upgradeing powers than you even had in the first game.

I'm seriously not worried, I think this game will be fu©king awesome.

Modifié par Davie McG, 08 août 2011 - 01:42 .

[Kabanya101]

Mass Effect 1 was a great mix of RPG and shooter. If it didn't have all the repetitive dungeons, it would have truly been a great RPG.

Mass Effect 2 went from an expansive, choose when or what you want to do, to linear missions that all revolved around combat mechanicsthat was just kill them or destroy this, instead of tracking down people or probes and having secondary objectives like they had in ME1.

Same thing with the Dragon Age series. Origins didn't have the perfect combat system, but it was unique to the game, and fit the RPG aspects of the game. But then took a 180 in Dragon Age 2 and went back to linear missions that were all repetitive and became combat driven game.

I just hope the third game in each series is divided evenly. Both ME2 and DA2 were, on my list, lower than Origins and ME1. The original games in the series had a better balance of combat and RPG.

I will give that both combat systems have improved greatly in the second game of the series, BUT have lost most RPG aspects of the game.

To JBONE27:
Dragon Age 2 was greatly inferior to Dragon Age Origins. DA2 had only two things going for it, and they were: the new combat system and Merrill.
The new combat system was nice because it didn't have as much as RTS gameplay, and it brought the player more into the combat. And Merrill was the only good character in DA2 because she was the only one with depth and personality, and was very unique.
DA2 moved completely away from the storyline that was built by Dragon Age Origins, and had a main character that had absolutely nothing to do with the main plot. I found it completely pointless to play after the first day I had it. Never finished it, don't care what the ending is, just know that it was completely dumb. So many things were wrong with the story, that I'd have to start my own forum just to explain them all.

Now for ME2. If ME2 would have had less linear missions, and some sort of exploration, then it would have been better than ME1. The role playing part of the game was better than ME1, but the thing it lacked was exploration. RPG are games that rely on the person "becoming" a person in the game and can make decisions and go where they want when they want.

[Doofe2012]

We'll all see how things turn out in March. Personally, based on the marketing speeches and the demo (yes I know we only saw one level), I don't have high hopes for this game as far as gameplay goes. I have no doubt the story and characters will be amazing, if only because ME fans will flip their **** if the romances and interaction are lackluster/hardly there.

That said, after seeing DA2, I think I can safely say Mass Effect 3 will be the last Bioware game I buy, if only to finish the story arc. Why? Because any later games I might as well watch on Youtube if linear campaigns and decisions that don't matter become the rule rather than the exception.

[HTTP 404]

whats an rpg?

also if a game doesn't require me to use my calculator to crunch the numbers, it isn't fun.

Modifié par HTTP 404, 08 août 2011 - 02:06 .

[Bogsnot1]

I stopped reading here;

“Mass Effect 3 plays, to all intents and purposes, like a straight-up third-person shooter,” wrote Martin Robinson in his preview piece, praising the polish of the title’s gameplay and drama, but also stating that the series now seemed to have “gone from an RPG with shooter elements to a third-person shooter with light RPG touches”.

Glad to see certain journalists have time machines and base their opinions on the fully finished game.

[Bogsnot1]

HTTP 404 wrote...
whats an rpg?

also if a game doesn't require me to use my calculator to crunch the numbers, it isn't fun.

You must be a casual RPG player then. I use a Cray. 

[Gatt9]

Davie McG wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

And I'm fine with that as well. However, I would ask Bioware to use a different IP rather than simply doing a 180 with their current franchises like Dragon Age. D


Bioware should decide for each IP who they want to appeal and not on trying to always a strike a balance with each IP. Please one group with a IP focused especially on them and I swear all complaints will diminish by great margin. 

Agreed as well. The issue we run into with DA2 (for myself at least) is that Origins was enjoyed as a return to the purist, old school style. By removing many these RPG elements, it's not clear what DA2 hoped to achieve.

In Mass Effect's case, it was a hybrid from the start, with lighter RPG elements than previous Bioware games and tps mechanics which didn't suit me. Hence why I'm comfortable with the changes.

I agree.

Although there were many changes in ME2 you didn't loose that much functionality. Weapon mods became weapon powers, instead of finding armour in random lockers you bought them from a shop. There were big changes like swaping out planet exploration for planet scanning, although I was a bit dissapointed with that I wouldn't call it a big RPG element.

We lost variety to an extent with squad customisation and we lost a bit of immersion with the inclusion of more loading screens. These two look like they are going to be addressed in 3, so I really don't see why people are so worried when if anything ME3 is going to be more like 1 than it was 2 only with an alteritive more immersive way of handling the inventory via shops and workbenches and a much needed improvement on combat. Also expanding more on upgradeing powers than you even had in the first game.

I'm seriously not worried, I think this game will be fu©king awesome.

I've gotta disagree with you there.  We lost an enourmous amount of functionality,  and sanity.

Weapon mods became weapon powers,  and became nonsensical at best (Utterly ridiculous in truth).  Putting skill points into bullets makes about as much sense as putting skill points into doorknobs.  A bullet does the same amount of damage no matter how many times you've used it,  my hollow-point rounds did the same thing to a phone book the 1st time I fired one as they did the 100th.  Further,  having bullets "Locked out" till you put skill points into them is ridiculous,  "OMG!  How do I fit this cylinder in the round hole!  I can't remember now!".  Then there's magically putting special bullets in allies guns from 30 ft away,  and bullets suddenly magically changing their effect when you put that last point into the skill.  Which is actually more like an Arcade Game from the 90's than it is an RPG.

Armor completely lost it's functionality and usefullness.  Instead of boosting your protection,  now all it does is change your appearance slightly and offers some completely insignificant boost.  It's got more in common with Barbie Dress Up than it does anything remotely resembling an RPG.  In an RPG,  armor actually does something,  in Barbie Dress Up,  all it does is change her looks. 

Why am I so worried?  ME2.  DA2.  EA's new initiatives.  The delay that appears to only have been done to facilitate the inclusion of elements that add absolutely nothing to the game,  only to sell more boxes.  The continued lack of non-combat skills,  the heavy emphasis on "Shooter shooter shooter!" in all the PR. 

At this point,  I'm hard pressed to find any info on anything RPG related,  and bombarded with PR about "Shooter!" and completely useless features mandated by EA.

[OdanUrr]

HTTP 404 wrote...

whats an rpg?

Rocket-propelled grenade?

Repeating plasma gun?

Rotary pulse generator?

Reflection phase grating?

[Whatever42]

I don't really disagree with the article. While I really enjoyed the shooter elements of the game, I agree that the heart of the game for me is the story and characters. I agree that ME2 did away with many RPG elements. I can understand why the author would prefer to have more of them back. While I think they were better done away with than implemented as badly as ME1, I welcome the return of greater customization in ME3.

The only part I really disagree with him is the DOOM sentiment he got from cherry picking quotes from Bioware marketeers. He completely ignored the deeper skill trees, the gun mods and workbenches, and the promise that there will be a more robust economy. From what we've seen in DLC, we can expect more exploration and more open terrains to give the game a more free feeling.

Now that the game is also going to have even better combat and better designed combat levels and enemy AI is a plus for me. The game isn't ALL about story and characters after all. One of the main reasons ME2 > ME1 for me is that the gameplay is actually fun.

BTW, I'm not sure I would characterize this opinion piece as a must-read. Nothing there that hasn't been said here and elsewhere many times.

[ThePwener]

OdanUrr wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

whats an rpg?

Rocket-propelled grenade?

Repeating plasma gun?

Rotary pulse generator?

Reflection phase grating?

Role playing game? Nah.......

[Savber100]

Gatt9 wrote...


At this point,  I'm hard pressed to find any info on anything RPG related,  and bombarded with PR about "Shooter!" and completely useless features mandated by EA.

.
I'm curious about what you thought of the branching leveling and the mods from what see saw at E3? Is it really just "SHOOOTER" when ME3 has shown to be working on making better RPG elements than in ME2? 

If EA wanted Bioware to go full-shooter, they would have ditched this system entirely rather than actually making it more in-depth. 

Modifié par Savber100, 08 août 2011 - 03:09 .

[Beerfish]

Kel_Sjet wrote...

IsaacShep wrote...

Not a very good article. Why? Because it's biased. Why? Because it brings all the quotes from BioWare devs saying how ME3 will be like Gears of War/action-adventure etc.

Actually, its an opinion piece, not a 'report on the game'. Furthermore, it actually talks about a much bigger picture that goes beyond just ME3. If you read the whole article, you would see that.



On a side point, this is kind of what I was afraid of (yet another artifact of building a community where anything that isn't "BW can do no wrong" is not tolerated).
Sure, unlike almost every other linked article on these forums, this guy isn't outright joygasming about ME3, but that alone isn't a solid enough point to automatically claim that he is wrong.

Meh, now I am second guessing myself for ever posting the link. /sigh

You have ZERO clue, do you even read these forums?  These forums bend way way over backwards to let people beotch, whine and complain about games and they surely do, in many many many threads.  If anything this site and these forums are way too lenient, just look at the utter trash some of the DA2 forums have become.

As per usual a person posts an opinion piece and then cries the blues when people actually try and rebut the contents of an article,

[CrazyCatDude]

JBONE27 wrote...

What's with all the DA2 hate? Other than the recycled dungeons and the fact that the love scenes were completely G rated, I loved it. In fact I preferred the plot, most of the characters (I didn't care for Anders or Fenris, but then again I never cared for Anders, and I didn't like anyone in the first game but Morrigan, Wynn, Leliana, Shale, and Alistar), and the gameplay to DA:O. It was rushed (though not as badly as Awakening, but it was fun and the plot was better. It was more politically driven, as opposed to the standard Bioware, "There's a big bad thing, and you have to collect stuff in order to destroy it," plot.
I know that that's a bit off topic, but it's really pissing me off.

It confuses me too.  I didn't even mind the recycled dungeons.  It made sense, given the story, because you were going back to the same places when they recycled those dungeons.  I enjoyed DA2 so much more than DA that it's not even funny.

I sometimes wonder if it's because DA2 is a tragedy, storywise, instead of a hero's journey.

[Youknow]

CrazyCatDude wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

What's with all the DA2 hate? Other than the recycled dungeons and the fact that the love scenes were completely G rated, I loved it. In fact I preferred the plot, most of the characters (I didn't care for Anders or Fenris, but then again I never cared for Anders, and I didn't like anyone in the first game but Morrigan, Wynn, Leliana, Shale, and Alistar), and the gameplay to DA:O. It was rushed (though not as badly as Awakening, but it was fun and the plot was better. It was more politically driven, as opposed to the standard Bioware, "There's a big bad thing, and you have to collect stuff in order to destroy it," plot.
I know that that's a bit off topic, but it's really pissing me off.

It confuses me too.  I didn't even mind the recycled dungeons.  It made sense, given the story, because you were going back to the same places when they recycled those dungeons.  I enjoyed DA2 so much more than DA that it's not even funny.

I sometimes wonder if it's because DA2 is a tragedy, storywise, instead of a hero's journey.

The recycled dungeons were far too plentiful even for a game that takes place in the same city. The reason you were going back to these same places, was because there weren't enough places to begin with. Let's use something like say Devil Survivor (you don't have to have played it to get this) for instance. The game takes place within one city. And many of the areas are blocked off because the area is under martial law. However, even within these restrictions, you won't be seeing the same areas constantly outside of your "home base." You might see about 3 maps reused a couple of times over the course of the game, and some of them are because they are storyline significant. In DA2, it's like "We're mages hiding somewhere," and it's in a place that you've been to before. And the only thing that comes to mind is "how would the guards or templars miss this?" 

That's not to say that DA2 didn't do some good things (level up system with certain things like tactics is far more sensible than DA:Os), but the things that it does wrong... Are really bad. It's easy to be enjoyable, but I can also see why people loathe it as well. 

[littlezack]

CrazyCatDude wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

What's with all the DA2 hate? Other than the recycled dungeons and the fact that the love scenes were completely G rated, I loved it. In fact I preferred the plot, most of the characters (I didn't care for Anders or Fenris, but then again I never cared for Anders, and I didn't like anyone in the first game but Morrigan, Wynn, Leliana, Shale, and Alistar), and the gameplay to DA:O. It was rushed (though not as badly as Awakening, but it was fun and the plot was better. It was more politically driven, as opposed to the standard Bioware, "There's a big bad thing, and you have to collect stuff in order to destroy it," plot.
I know that that's a bit off topic, but it's really pissing me off.

It confuses me too.  I didn't even mind the recycled dungeons.  It made sense, given the story, because you were going back to the same places when they recycled those dungeons.  I enjoyed DA2 so much more than DA that it's not even funny.

I sometimes wonder if it's because DA2 is a tragedy, storywise, instead of a hero's journey.

I thin DA2 is generally more focused on character development than most RPGs people are used to. The story is about Hawke and the people around him and how they grow - in a way, it's more akin to a novel, where you have a character that deals with threats and problems that might not all be completely tied together, but exist as obstacles in his path to become the Champion. It's a different approach, and I'll admit it doesn't work completely, but I do think it was a decent try and I'd like to see something done similar - it shouldn't be the norm, but it was an interesting change of pace.

Really, aside from the glitches, that's how I would define DA2 - a lot of great ideas, but not all of them are greatly executed. For all the hate it gets, it did a lot of things very well; I love the way it encourages you to develop different relationships with different characters and tracks them over time, leading to different scenes depending on the way they feel about you. I like the branching paths in the skill trees. The symbols indicating the dialogue choices were a brilliant idea.

I'd give the game a solid 7. Not great, not up to Bioware's standard, but not the abomination most people make it out to be. To hear some people tell it, you'd think it was the worst RPG ever made, as opposed to the worst Bioware made.

[Garrison2009]

LGTX wrote...

"A great many BioWare fans – myself included – fell in love with games like Mass Effect precisely because they are not Gears of War."

I stopped reading there. I fell in love with Mass Effect because it was Mass Effect, not because it was an "RPG" or "something new" or NOT something else, etc.

Sorry for not contributing fully to the discussion, just wanted to voice this.

In total agreement with you here! I did not fall in love, and continue to fall in love, with the Mass Effect Series because it was NOT Gears of War or NOT an FPS... I fell in love with it mainly for one very simple thing: The Story. The Gameplay mechanics ultimately do not concern me (Unless of course they turn around and make ME3 a puzzle game.. I think I'd be a little upset by that lol), the only thing I am concerned with is seeing the continuation and conclusion of Shepard's story. Seeing how he/she stops such an all-powerful foe such as the Reapers, and also seeing what  happens to all the various characters that surrounds him/her.

[Davie McG]

Gatt9 wrote...

Davie McG wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

And I'm fine with that as well. However, I would ask Bioware to use a different IP rather than simply doing a 180 with their current franchises like Dragon Age. D


Bioware should decide for each IP who they want to appeal and not on trying to always a strike a balance with each IP. Please one group with a IP focused especially on them and I swear all complaints will diminish by great margin. 

Agreed as well. The issue we run into with DA2 (for myself at least) is that Origins was enjoyed as a return to the purist, old school style. By removing many these RPG elements, it's not clear what DA2 hoped to achieve.

In Mass Effect's case, it was a hybrid from the start, with lighter RPG elements than previous Bioware games and tps mechanics which didn't suit me. Hence why I'm comfortable with the changes.

I agree.

Although there were many changes in ME2 you didn't loose that much functionality. Weapon mods became weapon powers, instead of finding armour in random lockers you bought them from a shop. There were big changes like swaping out planet exploration for planet scanning, although I was a bit dissapointed with that I wouldn't call it a big RPG element.

We lost variety to an extent with squad customisation and we lost a bit of immersion with the inclusion of more loading screens. These two look like they are going to be addressed in 3, so I really don't see why people are so worried when if anything ME3 is going to be more like 1 than it was 2 only with an alteritive more immersive way of handling the inventory via shops and workbenches and a much needed improvement on combat. Also expanding more on upgradeing powers than you even had in the first game.

I'm seriously not worried, I think this game will be fu©king awesome.

I've gotta disagree with you there.  We lost an enourmous amount of functionality,  and sanity.

Weapon mods became weapon powers,  and became nonsensical at best (Utterly ridiculous in truth).  Putting skill points into bullets makes about as much sense as putting skill points into doorknobs.  A bullet does the same amount of damage no matter how many times you've used it,  my hollow-point rounds did the same thing to a phone book the 1st time I fired one as they did the 100th.  Further,  having bullets "Locked out" till you put skill points into them is ridiculous,  "OMG!  How do I fit this cylinder in the round hole!  I can't remember now!".  Then there's magically putting special bullets in allies guns from 30 ft away,  and bullets suddenly magically changing their effect when you put that last point into the skill.  Which is actually more like an Arcade Game from the 90's than it is an RPG.

Armor completely lost it's functionality and usefullness.  Instead of boosting your protection,  now all it does is change your appearance slightly and offers some completely insignificant boost.  It's got more in common with Barbie Dress Up than it does anything remotely resembling an RPG.  In an RPG,  armor actually does something,  in Barbie Dress Up,  all it does is change her looks. 

Why am I so worried?  ME2.  DA2.  EA's new initiatives.  The delay that appears to only have been done to facilitate the inclusion of elements that add absolutely nothing to the game,  only to sell more boxes.  The continued lack of non-combat skills,  the heavy emphasis on "Shooter shooter shooter!" in all the PR. 

At this point,  I'm hard pressed to find any info on anything RPG related,  and bombarded with PR about "Shooter!" and completely useless features mandated by EA.

Ok the bullet powers make little sense and the mods were preferable but you didn't loose the functionality, if you wanted your assault rifle to do more damage you upgraded it via the research terminal ( yes I know planet scanning sucks) and your armour and health were both noticeably improved once they were upgraded, the same as they were when you put better mods in your suit in ME1.

What I'm saying is that as far as how these things affect your character and his weapons in game is my h the same (minus the god gun but since when was that a bad thing). So when I say we haven't really lost anything it's only because they deliver what you lost via something else whether that be research terminals or weapon powers with stats you can upgrade etc.

Plus the Third game will have better skill trees than both previous games and weapon customisation that makes more sense (even if they are sticking to the ammo powers).

The combat is something they need to improve upon, I suspect the reason they have been showing that off and not the skill trees is because the combat is more polished, looks cooler on a promotional demo and also that the skill trees probably aren't quite ready to show off.

By the sounds of things we're getting more RPG than me2 and better combat and the same good dialogue we've had throughout the series.

My apologies for this post being a bit shoddy and perhaps not as well constructed as it should be but I'm sending this from my phone and editing it is a nightmare. Besides I should have been asleep hours ago, I'll fox it tomorrow.