477 réponses à ce sujet

[Captain_Obvious]

I'll put in my two cents as happy in the direction the genre is going. Sure, there are some things that I don't like, but it's not all about me, and I don't allow the little things to ruin my gaming experience. I have no objections to what Bioware or any other RPG developer does. It's their game, and they don't owe me anything. If they go past my "RPG threshold" then I'll have to decide if I want to continue to play their games. Not a huge deal, really. To me, it's sort of silly to get bent out of shape over it. It's a video GAME. Rules change.

[AlanC9]

Nozybidaj wrote...

BW games being accepted as rpg's doesn't mean the genre has changed.  I'd argue that calling ME2 an rpg is the correct label (haven't playted DA2, sorry).  I'd call it more an action/shooter game.  I'd barely label ME1 an rpg.

Is there a typo there? It sounds like you're saying that ME2 is more of an RPG than ME1. (For me, they're both RPGs, which is simply to say that I can't think of a useful definition of RPG that would exclude either game)

The industry has made the label so meaningless that you could really classify just about anything an rpg now a days.  But that's beside the point.

So no, I really don't think the genre has changed much at all since the first computer rpg's were made, and likely won't till we see either new technologies that allow games to be presented differently or a developer out there somewhere comes up with something really revolutionary from a gameplay perspective.

I wasn't being clear, I think. What is a genre except a name for a collection of things that are agreed to be part of that genre? If people are using "RPG" to include a game, that game's an RPG, isn't it?

It's not like gamers in general are rejecting the way companies have been using "RPG."

[green_lemur]

Spanky Magoo wrote...

I personally love what bioware is doing with the genre, putting story above the archaic rpg staples of the past.

I like it too. I get all the action I want with a deep story. the light RPG elements work great too. It's a win/win for me!

[Nozybidaj]

AlanC9 wrote...
Is there a typo there? It sounds like you're saying that ME2 is more of an RPG than ME1. (For me, they're both RPGs, which is simply to say that I can't think of a useful definition of RPG that would exclude either game)

No, that's not what I meant.  I wouldn't label ME2 as an rpg.  It would more correctly be labeled action/shooter to me.  ME1 I'd label rpg-lite.

I wasn't being clear, I think. What is a genre except a name for a collection of things that are agreed to be part of that genre? If people are using "RPG" to include a game, that game's an RPG, isn't it?

"I called it an rpg there for it is".

They can call the game whatever they want, and yes it certainly has rpg elements sprinkled in it.  It also has shooter elements in it, but I would wager most folks on this forum would nerd rage and /wrists if anyone called it a shooter game.

In the end it doesn't really matter what they call it I suppose, its just a label.  A fairly meaningless label these days.

Modifié par Nozybidaj, 08 août 2011 - 05:33 .

[AlanC9]

Shepard the Leper wrote...
Stats are used primarily to give some sort of artificial sense of progress. That's not very meaningful to me. Almost all (so called) rpgs use leveling systems that make the player and all enemies stronger which results in none, or hardly any change in your character's performance. When my rank 2 Warp @ level 5 can remove the armor of a LOKI in one go; and I need to have rank 4 to do the same thing @ level 21, then all time spend in leveling screens is mostly wasted.

Since Gatt9's not here, I'll note his argument that this only proves that ME2 isn't an RPG in the first place. In a "real RPG," the creatures wouldn't scale, so you wouldn't fight LOKIs until some higher level when you could take them on with your powers.

Personally, I think that a definition of RPG that requires a D&D-like distribution of enemies only reveals the bankruptcy of the concept, but the argument's interesting to think about.

[AlanC9]

Nozybidaj wrote...

"I called it an rpg there for it is".

Ummm... not quite. It's "Most of us call it an RPG, therefore it is." That's just how language works.

But yeah, it doesn't matter. Whatever box you put the game in, it's still the same game.

[SalsaDMA]

littlezack wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Babli wrote...

The majority of new RPGs have less customization, less depth, less details and are shorter.

Thats not what I would call an evolution.

Ironically, I just completed GTA IV. Afterwards I felt that game, despite not being an RPG, was actually a gameseries that had evolved closer to being an rpg while ME2 was feeling like it was moving away from being an rpg...

I'd even go so far as claim that despite the lack of choices in conversations, GTA IV felt closer to an RPG than ME2 did, simply because of how the game focused.

In ME2 you are 'snapping' between shooting galleries, in GTA IV you controlled Niko while he was trying to figure out what to do with himselves and spent as much time just being Niko (if not more) as you were actually shooting stuff or speeding away from/after cars/helicopters/boats. You don't really spend time in ME2 just being Shepard, making the character a whole lot more hollow (and thus the roleplaying experience itself) in my opinion.

GTA4 is what I'd call an example of being too damn complex.

I hated the 'Just Being Niko' parts. The way you have to pick out clothes by walking around the store instead of a menu. The 'realistic' car physics that made them a pain to control. The lack of interesting vehicles. Being called every ten minutes to take somebody on a date, then getting treated like a jerk because I don't want to shoot darts with imaginary people. >_<

It's why I loved SR2 so much more - it's not the least bit realistic, but it's so much more fun. There's rarely a moment when you're doing something that's not fun. It's not trying to be some artsy-fartsy experience, it's not trying to hammer in some overwrought cliche about American life, it's just about blowing **** up and shooting things.

I'll be honest -  I don't care what Shepard does when he's not saving the world. I don't need a scene with him sitting down and watching TV, or checking out the listings to see what the movie times are. I don't want to take Liara out on a date. Call me crazy, but I think videogames should be first and foremost about escapism, not the same boring crap I do in everyday life.

I guess we have to disagree. I didn't consider playing as Niko an "artsy-fartsy experience", quite the contrary. If anything, I'd call Shepard closer to the 'artsy-farty experience' because it is pretentious in its claims, while delivering little actual substance. I find it telling that your comments basicly bogs down to: you don't want to play the role, but only the game. In other words, you don't really want a roleplaying game, but just a regular action game where you don't have to pay attention to the actual world you are playing in. One can only wonder why you want to play something labeled as a roleplaying game, when you appearantly aren't really interested in the genre.

Storytelling in regular action games have come a long way by now, so if you just want a regular actiongame with a decent story that is quite possible to acomplish without having to jump through the hoop you don't like called roleplaying. So why try and change another genre you don't like into something it isn't, when you could just get what you want from a genre that fits what you like in the first place?

[AlanC9]

SalsaDMA wrote...
I guess we have to disagree. I didn't consider playing as Niko an "artsy-fartsy experience", quite the contrary. If anything, I'd call Shepard closer to the 'artsy-farty experience' because it is pretentious in its claims, while delivering little actual substance. I find it telling that your comments basicly bogs down to: you don't want to play the role, but only the game. 

Hmmm... what I took away from the post is that he wants the maintenance stuff abstracted out of the game. This goes all the way back to D&D, where uninteresting stuff happens in the game's off-hours.

[littlezack]

SalsaDMA wrote...

littlezack wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Babli wrote...

The majority of new RPGs have less customization, less depth, less details and are shorter.

Thats not what I would call an evolution.

Ironically, I just completed GTA IV. Afterwards I felt that game, despite not being an RPG, was actually a gameseries that had evolved closer to being an rpg while ME2 was feeling like it was moving away from being an rpg...

I'd even go so far as claim that despite the lack of choices in conversations, GTA IV felt closer to an RPG than ME2 did, simply because of how the game focused.

In ME2 you are 'snapping' between shooting galleries, in GTA IV you controlled Niko while he was trying to figure out what to do with himselves and spent as much time just being Niko (if not more) as you were actually shooting stuff or speeding away from/after cars/helicopters/boats. You don't really spend time in ME2 just being Shepard, making the character a whole lot more hollow (and thus the roleplaying experience itself) in my opinion.

GTA4 is what I'd call an example of being too damn complex.

I hated the 'Just Being Niko' parts. The way you have to pick out clothes by walking around the store instead of a menu. The 'realistic' car physics that made them a pain to control. The lack of interesting vehicles. Being called every ten minutes to take somebody on a date, then getting treated like a jerk because I don't want to shoot darts with imaginary people. >_<

It's why I loved SR2 so much more - it's not the least bit realistic, but it's so much more fun. There's rarely a moment when you're doing something that's not fun. It's not trying to be some artsy-fartsy experience, it's not trying to hammer in some overwrought cliche about American life, it's just about blowing **** up and shooting things.

I'll be honest -  I don't care what Shepard does when he's not saving the world. I don't need a scene with him sitting down and watching TV, or checking out the listings to see what the movie times are. I don't want to take Liara out on a date. Call me crazy, but I think videogames should be first and foremost about escapism, not the same boring crap I do in everyday life.

I guess we have to disagree. I didn't consider playing as Niko an "artsy-fartsy experience", quite the contrary. If anything, I'd call Shepard closer to the 'artsy-farty experience' because it is pretentious in its claims, while delivering little actual substance. I find it telling that your comments basicly bogs down to: you don't want to play the role, but only the game. In other words, you don't really want a roleplaying game, but just a regular action game where you don't have to pay attention to the actual world you are playing in. One can only wonder why you want to play something labeled as a roleplaying game, when you appearantly aren't really interested in the genre.

That's not what I'm saying at all.

When Niko takes his cousin bowling, does that really add anything to anything? It doesn't develop character. It isn't fun to watch or play. Do I really need to take frequent trips to the strip club to watch a bunch of polygons dance around a pole? I mean, really, where does it end? Do I have to do Niko's income taxes next? A plumbing minigame? Tying his shoes?

There is a point in realism when a game stops being a game and starts becoming life...which is fine for, say, the Sims, I guess, but come - it's GRAND THEFT AUTO. I didn't buy the game for a dating simulator.

Modifié par littlezack, 08 août 2011 - 05:57 .

[SalsaDMA]

AlanC9 wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...
I guess we have to disagree. I didn't consider playing as Niko an "artsy-fartsy experience", quite the contrary. If anything, I'd call Shepard closer to the 'artsy-farty experience' because it is pretentious in its claims, while delivering little actual substance. I find it telling that your comments basicly bogs down to: you don't want to play the role, but only the game. 

Hmmm... what I took away from the post is that he wants the maintenance stuff abstracted out of the game. This goes all the way back to D&D, where uninteresting stuff happens in the game's off-hours.

Being able to turn on the TV and sit watching the shows, taking people on dates, hanging out with your friends, cruising around town stumbling upon 'friend sidemissions' or just doing stuff for the sake of doing it is hardly what I would call "maintanance". Hell, first time I heard about GTA IV from a friend of mine, he told me he had spent an hour or so just watching the TV in Nikos apartment.

Being forced to sleep or eat at regular intervals or visiting the toilet every now and then is what I would call maintanance. I can't imagine a pen and paper group finding it interesting to play out taking a dump, for example, but I can easy see it being interesting to play out a date or hitting the local bar for some darts.

[littlezack]

SalsaDMA wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...
I guess we have to disagree. I didn't consider playing as Niko an "artsy-fartsy experience", quite the contrary. If anything, I'd call Shepard closer to the 'artsy-farty experience' because it is pretentious in its claims, while delivering little actual substance. I find it telling that your comments basicly bogs down to: you don't want to play the role, but only the game. 

Hmmm... what I took away from the post is that he wants the maintenance stuff abstracted out of the game. This goes all the way back to D&D, where uninteresting stuff happens in the game's off-hours.

Being able to turn on the TV and sit watching the shows, taking people on dates, hanging out with your friends, cruising around town stumbling upon 'friend sidemissions' or just doing stuff for the sake of doing it is hardly what I would call "maintanance". Hell, first time I heard about GTA IV from a friend of mine, he told me he had spent an hour or so just watching the TV in Nikos apartment.

Being forced to sleep or eat at regular intervals or visiting the toilet every now and then is what I would call maintanance. I can't imagine a pen and paper group finding it interesting to play out taking a dump, for example, but I can easy see it being interesting to play out a date or hitting the local bar for some darts.

TheTV thing I'll grant you because it was just entertaining, but I really do not expect Commander Shepard to take a pause in the middle of saving the galaxy to take Liara out on a romantic date. 

[SalsaDMA]

littlezack wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

littlezack wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Babli wrote...

The majority of new RPGs have less customization, less depth, less details and are shorter.

Thats not what I would call an evolution.

Ironically, I just completed GTA IV. Afterwards I felt that game, despite not being an RPG, was actually a gameseries that had evolved closer to being an rpg while ME2 was feeling like it was moving away from being an rpg...

I'd even go so far as claim that despite the lack of choices in conversations, GTA IV felt closer to an RPG than ME2 did, simply because of how the game focused.

In ME2 you are 'snapping' between shooting galleries, in GTA IV you controlled Niko while he was trying to figure out what to do with himselves and spent as much time just being Niko (if not more) as you were actually shooting stuff or speeding away from/after cars/helicopters/boats. You don't really spend time in ME2 just being Shepard, making the character a whole lot more hollow (and thus the roleplaying experience itself) in my opinion.

GTA4 is what I'd call an example of being too damn complex.

I hated the 'Just Being Niko' parts. The way you have to pick out clothes by walking around the store instead of a menu. The 'realistic' car physics that made them a pain to control. The lack of interesting vehicles. Being called every ten minutes to take somebody on a date, then getting treated like a jerk because I don't want to shoot darts with imaginary people. >_<

It's why I loved SR2 so much more - it's not the least bit realistic, but it's so much more fun. There's rarely a moment when you're doing something that's not fun. It's not trying to be some artsy-fartsy experience, it's not trying to hammer in some overwrought cliche about American life, it's just about blowing **** up and shooting things.

I'll be honest -  I don't care what Shepard does when he's not saving the world. I don't need a scene with him sitting down and watching TV, or checking out the listings to see what the movie times are. I don't want to take Liara out on a date. Call me crazy, but I think videogames should be first and foremost about escapism, not the same boring crap I do in everyday life.

I guess we have to disagree. I didn't consider playing as Niko an "artsy-fartsy experience", quite the contrary. If anything, I'd call Shepard closer to the 'artsy-farty experience' because it is pretentious in its claims, while delivering little actual substance. I find it telling that your comments basicly bogs down to: you don't want to play the role, but only the game. In other words, you don't really want a roleplaying game, but just a regular action game where you don't have to pay attention to the actual world you are playing in. One can only wonder why you want to play something labeled as a roleplaying game, when you appearantly aren't really interested in the genre.

That's not what I'm saying at all.

When Niko takes his cousin bowling, does that really add anything to anything? It doesn't develop character. It isn't fun to watch or play. Do I really need to take frequent trips to the strip club to watch a bunch of polygons dance around a pole? I mean, really, where does it end? Do I have to do Niko's income taxes next? A plumbing minigame? Tying his shoes?

You're not forced to take his cousin bowling. Just don't be surprised when the people in the game responds to your choice of NOT spending time with them, then. Take Kate, for example. I never really romanced her or anything, aside taking her out for a single date cause Packie told me to. Even so, she ended up being in the place plotwise where she did. The game didn't force me into behaving a certain way for the plot to unfold. Could the game have been more responding towards the choices you did while playing Niko in regards to the actual plot? Sure, but then again the game never claimed it was a rpg. ME2, however, DID claim that label, and still felt like it was playing secondviolin in as far as actually making the player feel he/she was playing the role of Shepard compared to
how GTA IV made the player feel he/she was playing the role of Niko.

But yes, it does at its very basic level 'develop' the character you are playing. either the character is a jerk that doesn't really care about his friends, or his friends are close to him and he spends time caring for and developing those friendships.

[Candidate 88766]

green_lemur wrote...

Spanky Magoo wrote...

I personally love what bioware is doing with the genre, putting story above the archaic rpg staples of the past.

I like it too. I get all the action I want with a deep story. the light RPG elements work great too. It's a win/win for me!

+1

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 08 août 2011 - 06:03 .

[SalsaDMA]

littlezack wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...
I guess we have to disagree. I didn't consider playing as Niko an "artsy-fartsy experience", quite the contrary. If anything, I'd call Shepard closer to the 'artsy-farty experience' because it is pretentious in its claims, while delivering little actual substance. I find it telling that your comments basicly bogs down to: you don't want to play the role, but only the game. 

Hmmm... what I took away from the post is that he wants the maintenance stuff abstracted out of the game. This goes all the way back to D&D, where uninteresting stuff happens in the game's off-hours.

Being able to turn on the TV and sit watching the shows, taking people on dates, hanging out with your friends, cruising around town stumbling upon 'friend sidemissions' or just doing stuff for the sake of doing it is hardly what I would call "maintanance". Hell, first time I heard about GTA IV from a friend of mine, he told me he had spent an hour or so just watching the TV in Nikos apartment.

Being forced to sleep or eat at regular intervals or visiting the toilet every now and then is what I would call maintanance. I can't imagine a pen and paper group finding it interesting to play out taking a dump, for example, but I can easy see it being interesting to play out a date or hitting the local bar for some darts.

TheTV thing I'll grant you because it was just entertaining, but I really do not expect Commander Shepard to take a pause in the middle of saving the galaxy to take Liara out on a romantic date. 

Considered everything else there is time for, I wouldn't consider it implausible to get time for a date with Liara
Heck, there is even time for it a single time in "Lair of the Shadowbroker"

But more dates might have given a better impression of the relations between Shepard and his/her Love interest.

It's basicly:
Shepard: -"Hi, I'm Commander Shepard, and this is my favourite love interest on the Normandy."
LI: "Ok, final mission series coming up, let's do this in a funky montage."

[C9316]

Seeing as it is a gamerant article, is it even worth reading?

[MonkeyLungs]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Or rather, action games are growing into RPGs.

Nothing about role playing requires or demands stat-based leveling. Even the JRPGs of Final Fantasy are famous for (sometimes) great stories and stat-based leveling and customization... but the crux of RPG is Role Playing.

Level-up systems are a game mechanic. Mass-inventory is a game mechanic. All an RPG needs to be in order to be an RPG is the ability for the player to shape and define their role in the story: all other mechanics are supplementary, not requisites.

As someone who played RPG before there were computer games I have to point out that that game mechanics and systems ARE THE RPG. Stories and adventures and the role playing is done within the framework of the mechanics and allows players to create characters and participate all within the framework of the game system and mechanics. Some systems have more or less rules.

A computer game by its very nature has to be rather rule dependant because everything must be determined by mathematical calculations. Whether the designers want to share the stats and systems with the gamers and incorporate them into the game by allowing players to mold their characters with choices is one of the things that separates action games from RPG's. Even basic action games are loaded with stats and mechanics under the hood, they just aren't alterable by player choice.

By your definition any game that allows for the player to help determine the narrative is an RPG. I think that is absurd.

[littlezack]

You're not forced to take his cousin bowling. Just don't be surprised when the people in the game responds to your choice of NOT spending time with them, then. Take Kate, for example. I never really romanced her or anything, aside taking her out for a single date cause Packie told me to. Even so, she ended up being in the place plotwise where she did. The game didn't force me into behaving a certain way for the plot to unfold. Could the game have been more responding towards the choices you did while playing Niko in regards to the actual plot? Sure, but then again the game never claimed it was a rpg. ME2, however, DID claim that label, and still felt like it was playing secondviolin in as far as actually making the player feel he/she was playing the role of Shepard compared to
how GTA IV made the player feel he/she was playing the role of Niko.

But yes, it does at its very basic level 'develop' the character you are playing. either the character is a jerk that doesn't really care about his friends, or his friends are close to him and he spends time caring for and developing those friendships.

First off, while the game doesn't make you do anything, it bugs the hell out of you. Imagine if, in Mass Effect 2, Grunt constantly called you about doing his Loyalty Mission. Like, every ten minutes, just nagging you. And if you don't do it, he ****es on every mission you take him on. Realistic? Sure. Annoying as hell? Oh yeah.

And the reason I hate the dates isn't because of the people, it's because the minigames are boring. And then, when you don't want to do it, the game shames you and throws it in your face. How is that even realistic? When I tell my friend that I don't feel like doing something, he doesn't act like I've betrayed him, he just goes without me. Are there lives so shallow that they can't exist without Niko Bellic? Do they have no other friends, nobody else they could take to the strip club for 50th time? It's not like Niko's even that fun of a person to be around; he's a consistent downer.

Modifié par littlezack, 08 août 2011 - 06:12 .

[SNascimento]

Considering Mass Effect 2 is the best RPG ever made I would say evolving.

[SalsaDMA]

littlezack wrote...

You're not forced to take his cousin bowling. Just don't be surprised when the people in the game responds to your choice of NOT spending time with them, then. Take Kate, for example. I never really romanced her or anything, aside taking her out for a single date cause Packie told me to. Even so, she ended up being in the place plotwise where she did. The game didn't force me into behaving a certain way for the plot to unfold. Could the game have been more responding towards the choices you did while playing Niko in regards to the actual plot? Sure, but then again the game never claimed it was a rpg. ME2, however, DID claim that label, and still felt like it was playing secondviolin in as far as actually making the player feel he/she was playing the role of Shepard compared to
how GTA IV made the player feel he/she was playing the role of Niko.

But yes, it does at its very basic level 'develop' the character you are playing. either the character is a jerk that doesn't really care about his friends, or his friends are close to him and he spends time caring for and developing those friendships.

First off, while the game doesn't make you do anything, it bugs the hell out of you. Imagine if, in Mass Effect 2, Grunt constantly called you about doing his Loyalty Mission. Like, every ten minutes, just nagging you. And if you don't do it, he ****es on every mission you take him on. Realistic? Sure. Annoying as hell? Oh yeah.

And the reason I hate the dates isn't because of the people, it's because the minigames are boring. And then, when you don't want to do it, the game shames you and throws it in your face. How is that even realistic? When I tell my friend that I don't feel like doing something, he doesn't act like I've betrayed him, he just goes without me. Are there lives so shallow that they can't exist without Niko Bellic? Do they have no other friends, nobody else they could take to the strip club for 50th time?

Hmm... I don't recall them ****ing about it if I didn't hang out with them. Dwayne whined a bit cause I didn't hang out with him much, but Dwayne was also Dwayne, you know? technically he was having this shallow existence. Heck, he was even considering putting a bullet to his own head so full of selfpity he was.
I never went out with Packie, and he just accepted it. Little Jacob I sometimes went out with, sometimes not, and it only affected wether or not I could buy guns from him. He wasn't too hooked up on it, unless I stood him up (but that went for any of them, which is understandable). Brucie was Brucie. In a way, I guess you could tie him up as being somewhat like Dwayne in his need for constantly needing to feel accepted, and again it was part of his character.

Long story short, I felt any comments they made in regards to how I treated them was within their character.

As for how 'exciting' the minigames were.... I would still consider them slightly more interesting than the minigames of ME1 and ME2
Edit: At leat you played 'against' someone in the GTA minigames, whereas ME series were just doing the chore.

Modifié par SalsaDMA, 08 août 2011 - 06:18 .

[littlezack]

At least the minigames in ME1 and ME2 are over fast.

[littlezack]

SalsaDMA wrote...

littlezack wrote...

You're not forced to take his cousin bowling. Just don't be surprised when the people in the game responds to your choice of NOT spending time with them, then. Take Kate, for example. I never really romanced her or anything, aside taking her out for a single date cause Packie told me to. Even so, she ended up being in the place plotwise where she did. The game didn't force me into behaving a certain way for the plot to unfold. Could the game have been more responding towards the choices you did while playing Niko in regards to the actual plot? Sure, but then again the game never claimed it was a rpg. ME2, however, DID claim that label, and still felt like it was playing secondviolin in as far as actually making the player feel he/she was playing the role of Shepard compared to
how GTA IV made the player feel he/she was playing the role of Niko.

But yes, it does at its very basic level 'develop' the character you are playing. either the character is a jerk that doesn't really care about his friends, or his friends are close to him and he spends time caring for and developing those friendships.

First off, while the game doesn't make you do anything, it bugs the hell out of you. Imagine if, in Mass Effect 2, Grunt constantly called you about doing his Loyalty Mission. Like, every ten minutes, just nagging you. And if you don't do it, he ****es on every mission you take him on. Realistic? Sure. Annoying as hell? Oh yeah.

And the reason I hate the dates isn't because of the people, it's because the minigames are boring. And then, when you don't want to do it, the game shames you and throws it in your face. How is that even realistic? When I tell my friend that I don't feel like doing something, he doesn't act like I've betrayed him, he just goes without me. Are there lives so shallow that they can't exist without Niko Bellic? Do they have no other friends, nobody else they could take to the strip club for 50th time?

Hmm... I don't recall them ****ing about it if I didn't hang out with them. Dwayne whined a bit cause I didn't hang out with him much, but Dwayne was also Dwayne, you know? technically he was having this shallow existence. Heck, he was even considering putting a bullet to his own head so full of selfpity he was.
I never went out with Packie, and he just accepted it. Little Jacob I sometimes went out with, sometimes not, and it only affected wether or not I could buy guns from him. He wasn't too hooked up on it, unless I stood him up (but that went for any of them, which is understandable). Brucie was Brucie. In a way, I guess you could tie him up as being somewhat like Dwayne in his need for constantly needing to feel accepted, and again it was part of his character.

Long story short, I felt any comments they made in regards to how I treated them was within their character.

As for how 'exciting' the minigames were.... I would still consider them slightly more interesting than the minigames of ME1 and ME2
Edit: At leat you played 'against' someone in the GTA minigames, whereas ME series were just doing the chore.

And now that I really stop and think about, most RPGs aren't like that at all. And they really shouldn't be.

I might be wrong, but I think every RPG ever made has had, bare minimum, one thing - a quest. Something that needs to be done above all else. Somewhere the characters have to go, somebody they have kill, something they need to get, whatever. You might get the occasional subplot or character development scene, but you don't see an RPG hero stopping to go bowling or do something that's completely superflouos to the main story. Quite frankly, they got **** to do.

Niko can get away with this somewhat, because he doesn't really have a goal, per se; he's just trying to get from day to day (and failing miserably) Shepard, on the other hand, is trying to stop the galaxy from being destroyed by giant, evil cuttlefish. I don't mind the occasional scene of him enjoying a drink or learning more about the crew - even soldiers in war talk to each other from time to time, it's to be expected. But he shouldn't be stopping by the Citadel for a go on the slot machines or anything like that.

[Radwar]

RPG's aren't evolving, they're getting streamlined. The differences between DAO & DA2 are pretty evident and DA2 deserved all the flak it got.