528 réponses à ce sujet

[KenKenpachi]

Da_Lion_Man wrote...

That statement annoys me. I like old-school RPGs more. =(

sevach wrote...

A great story is not enough, it needs to be an (highly) interactive story where you can choose how you play.

I feel that, instead of improving this interactiveness area, making it even more interactive, Bioware has been taking steps back and making things more linear with extra emphasis on action.

Urazz wrote...

I pretty much play games for their story and/or their gameplay. I rather enjoy the fact that bioware is trying to cut out the more tiring aspects of RPGs.

See proves my point, we all can't agree on why we like bioware, its direction, or what an RPG even is.

[Il Divo]

KenKenpachi wrote...

Da_Lion_Man wrote...

That statement annoys me. I like old-school RPGs more. =(

sevach wrote...

A great story is not enough, it needs to be an (highly) interactive story where you can choose how you play.

I feel that, instead of improving this interactiveness area, making it even more interactive, Bioware has been taking steps back and making things more linear with extra emphasis on action.

Urazz wrote...

I pretty much play games for their story and/or their gameplay. I rather enjoy the fact that bioware is trying to cut out the more tiring aspects of RPGs.

See proves my point, we all can't agree on why we like bioware, its direction, or what an RPG even is.

For the record, I'd like to place my vote with "interactive narrative". Thank you.

[KenKenpachi]

I mainly ment, how can RPG's be relevant, when we have this much division. It would be better to just bury the Term and use it as a Mechanic and game type add on.

DA:2 = Action Adventure RPG

ME:2 = shooter RPG.

If you try to please the starting BG crowd, you ****** off the new comers, you make them happy, then its the reverse. Then you have the JRPGers, etc, etc. As long as bioware makes "RPGs" it will never have a stable unified market, as the fanbase for those games isn't unified. And Bioware isn't alone in this. Numerous companies are considering killing the term, and just using it as a subtype. Hell even OXM agrees with it.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 22 août 2011 - 11:06 .

[LoK-y-Yo]

Perhaps they just needed to please their fans which made them be where they are now, while trying to improve that mechanics so it gets new players instead of aggrieving them just for the sake of getting new ones.

If they wanted a mainstream game, the best is a new IP. They wouldn't have had these kind of problems.

And DA2 is not an Action Adventure RPG, nor ME2 and FPS RPG. They are just an Action Adventure rpg tinged and a FPS rpg tinged. With good history. The second one. If you want to know what is an RPG look for KOTOR, BG, NW, Elder Scrolls, Might and Magic (not Heroes of). That's your Western RPG like games. Now compare them to this two and tell me the principal differences.

Having the same name doesn't mean they are still from the same genre. If you want proof, just see what happened to Gothic from 3 to 4. It suddenly become an adventure game and the succesor was Risen, from the same developers of Gothic 3. DA was meant to be BG succesor and if they wanted to make a new shiny game for all the people to like it make a new IP and not use something that it is suppose to be the succesor of a classical western RPG. Though this has been said a lot it doesn't make it less true.

Modifié par LoK-y-Yo, 22 août 2011 - 11:39 .

[KenKenpachi]

LoK-y-Yo wrote...

Perhaps they just needed to please their fans which made them be where they are now, while trying to improve that mechanics so it gets new players instead of aggrieving them just for the sake of getting new ones.
.

Minus where they were and want to go isn't the same. I jumped on as a huge bioware fan with ME, a good number of others on here too. In fact the people you want to cast off are in the majority now. And bioware has made it clear who is favored now.

[Bryy_Miller]

I'm surprised this is not on Kotaku yet. Off to NeoGAF...

[LoK-y-Yo]

KenKenpachi wrote...

LoK-y-Yo wrote...

Perhaps they just needed to please their fans which made them be where they are now, while trying to improve that mechanics so it gets new players instead of aggrieving them just for the sake of getting new ones.
.

Minus where they were and want to go isn't the same. I jumped on as a huge bioware fan with ME, a good number of others on here too. In fact the people you want to cast off are in the majority now. And bioware has made it clear who is favored now.

If they are carrying on with the IP of course they should please the ones bought the previous one. And you can't say DAO wasn't a good place since it was a comercial and critical success. Other thing is to make a new IP. Or a spin-off. That I would be happy with a new direction since increases its posibilities.

Modifié par LoK-y-Yo, 22 août 2011 - 11:44 .

[EternalPink]

LoK-y-Yo wrote...

Perhaps they just needed to please their fans which made them be where they are now, while trying to improve that mechanics so it gets new players instead of aggrieving them just for the sake of getting new ones.

If they wanted a mainstream game, the best is a new IP. They wouldn't have had these kind of problems.

And DA2 is not an Action Adventure RPG, nor ME2 and FPS RPG. They are just an Action Adventure rpg tinged and a FPS rpg tinged. With good history. The second one. If you want to know what is an RPG look for KOTOR, BG, NW, Elder Scrolls, Might and Magic (not Heroes of). That's your Western RPG like games. Now compare them to this two and tell me the principal differences.

Having the same name doesn't mean they are still from the same genre. If you want proof, just see what happened to Gothic from 3 to 4. It suddenly become an adventure game and the succesor was Risen, from the same developers of Gothic 3. DA was meant to be BG succesor and if they wanted to make a new shiny game for all the people to like it make a new IP and not use something that it is suppose to be the succesor of a classical western RPG. Though this has been said a lot it doesn't make it less true.

KOTOR,BG,NW, Elder scrolls (depending on which one) and Might and Magic are all quite dated now, so the principal difference is that DA2 and ME2 are current (well last year) and the others are not.

So are there any current games your happy to compare to rather than old ones?

I'd place quite a lot of money (well if i had it) on the old definitions being terms used at the time, not definitions written in stone to be used forever more

[slimgrin]

I can't take anything Greg says seriously anymore. And keep in mind he speaks for Bioware alone, as if they rule the industry or something. Bethesda, Larian, Obsidian, CDPR - they all happen to feel differently, and they don't feel the need to belittle the foundations of an RPG. Saying 'golly gee, it's just about the story' is as trite as it gets, especially coming from a Bioware rep.

Modifié par slimgrin, 22 août 2011 - 11:55 .

[LoK-y-Yo]

EternalPink wrote...

KOTOR,BG,NW, Elder scrolls (depending on which one) and Might and Magic are all quite dated now, so the principal difference is that DA2 and ME2 are current (well last year) and the others are not.

So are there any current games your happy to compare to rather than old ones?

I'd place quite a lot of money (well if i had it) on the old definitions being terms used at the time, not definitions written in stone to be used forever more

DAO, does it pleases it now to you?And being old doesn't mean to be bad or not comparable to. Yes, Might and Magic are very old so does BG. Not so much NW since you can still buy and play it for a good price. Elder Scroll is that old? Oblivion was good if not for the autoscale but it is a good one to compare to. And if DA was supposed to be succesor to BG is because it was a good one to be like it with new technology.

[Hathur]

I for one don't care what one calls it.. RPG or whatever.. so long as the game has a strong emphasis on rich character and story development and dialogue, then I'm interested.

If it's a game with none of those things, then I'm not interested.

Call it RPG.. call it shooter.. call it a pony... don't care personally... the substance is what matters, not some silly label / title.

[Bcuz]

 I may be reading this wrong, so bear with me if I seem off topic.

If a picture is worth a thousand words, and a movie is a thousand pictures, then a movie is worth one million words.

If a movie is a thousand pictures (and so worth a million words), and a video game arranges those pictues in a thousand ways, then a video game is worth a billion words.

Story is important, without it there would be little reason to play (an RPG). But in a video game, the gameplay must be strong as well, otherwise the product will be worth significantly less words. Do I support better story? Of course. It is the adhesive upon the edge of your seat, and keeps us engaded. But without strong gameplay, a video game is merely a movie, and I did not just spend $80 on an interactive movie.

[slimgrin]

Bcuz wrote...

 I may be reading this wrong, so bear with me if I seem off topic.

If a picture is worth a thousand words, and a movie is a thousand pictures, then a movie is worth one million words.

If a movie is a thousand pictures (and so worth a million words), and a video game arranges those pictues in a thousand ways, then a video game is worth a billion words.

Story is important, without it there would be little reason to play (an RPG). But in a video game, the gameplay must be strong as well, otherwise the product will be worth significantly less words. Do I support better story? Of course. It is the adhesive upon the edge of your seat, and keeps us engaded. But without strong gameplay, a video game is merely a movie, and I did not just spend $80 on an interactive movie.

Exactly. I've no interest in interactive movies. I want a game.

[EternalPink]

I'm not saying being old makes it bad but in some cases its very hard to compare, take fallout 2 and fallout 3. I like both these games but if you asked me which game i enjoyed more at the time i played it i'd say fallout 2.

If you asked me which i want to play tomorrow you'd get fallout 3 since while i have loving memories of fallout 2 and the freedom (hell we could become a porn star, they made a perk for this) and creativity of the game i'm use to shiny graphics and fluid combat which makes playing fallout 2's turn based low res graphics a pain and i think a lot of people that played games such as BG1 and BG2 are in the same boat

[LoK-y-Yo]

Bcuz wrote...

 I may be reading this wrong, so bear with me if I seem off topic.

If a picture is worth a thousand words, and a movie is a thousand pictures, then a movie is worth one million words.

If a movie is a thousand pictures (and so worth a million words), and a video game arranges those pictues in a thousand ways, then a video game is worth a billion words.

Story is important, without it there would be little reason to play (an RPG). But in a video game, the gameplay must be strong as well, otherwise the product will be worth significantly less words. Do I support better story? Of course. It is the adhesive upon the edge of your seat, and keeps us engaded. But without strong gameplay, a video game is merely a movie, and I did not just spend $80 on an interactive movie.

Of course. If you want a good history go to read The Ulises. Or Dracula. Or The Name of the Wind.
As a good history doesn't make good by default a book or a movie (how many books/movies are so bad because the acting/recording or writing was not good enough to the history and made for a bad thing and vice versa,  a good acting/writing can counter a not so good history) , for a game I not only want a good history but a better gameplay. For a good game, the first is a good add up but gameplay is necessary and sufficient.

[LoK-y-Yo]

EternalPink wrote...

I'm not saying being old makes it bad but in some cases its very hard to compare, take fallout 2 and fallout 3. I like both these games but if you asked me which game i enjoyed more at the time i played it i'd say fallout 2.

If you asked me which i want to play tomorrow you'd get fallout 3 since while i have loving memories of fallout 2 and the freedom (hell we could become a porn star, they made a perk for this) and creativity of the game i'm use to shiny graphics and fluid combat which makes playing fallout 2's turn based low res graphics a pain and i think a lot of people that played games such as BG1 and BG2 are in the same boat

Then make them with new shiny graphics. You can even make it real time and be a great game. Improve the mechanics. If something doesn't work you start again. But if something does, you build upon it.

[Stompi]

No. Every game MUST me a classical RPG like Baldur's Gate 2 or I will lead a holy war against the developer. I don't like variety. I don't like changes that have improved other games over the last decade. Most of all, I don't like innovation. I want to play the same games over and over and over again.

Oh, wait. That's not me, but must of the other people out there. I only want to know if the games are fun.

[LoK-y-Yo]

Double post. Sorry

Modifié par LoK-y-Yo, 23 août 2011 - 12:19 .

[Lunatic LK47]

Stompi wrote...

No. Every game MUST me a classical RPG like Baldur's Gate 2 or I will lead a holy war against the developer. I don't like variety. I don't like changes that have improved other games over the last decade. Most of all, I don't like innovation. I want to play the same games over and over and over again.

Oh, wait. That's not me, but must of the other people out there. I only want to know if the games are fun.

Definitely want to sig your first paragraph about this. Sums up my attitude about the "BioWare forsake its roots" crowd as well as the Japanese game developers.

[Kusy]

Therefore_I_Am wrote...

Mr.Kusy wrote...

Who cares, BioWare will stop making games after 2012 if everything goes well... they will live from TOR sales for the next 6 years releasing 2 maybee 3 games in that period, while at least one of them will be just an expansion for the previous.

Because history likes to repeat itself.

You need to get rid of the emo look, the hair covers your right eye way too much.

Wooo... it hurts so much man. I might cut my wrists in the wrong direction now that you insulted me with something you probobly heard on Disney Chanel.

[LoK-y-Yo]

Stompi wrote...

No. Every game MUST me a classical RPG like Baldur's Gate 2 or I will lead a holy war against the developer. I don't like variety. I don't like changes that have improved other games over the last decade. Most of all, I don't like innovation. I want to play the same games over and over and over again.

Oh, wait. That's not me, but must of the other people out there. I only want to know if the games are fun.

Then don't call it succesor. Just call it a new shiny new game that everybody will love it. I am not against improvements. I am against having an IP working and taking it to the opposite direction. Make a spin-off for that. Or a new IP. 

[Bcuz]

Making an addundum, I do not wish to say only improve the gameplay and forget the story, that would be making the video game equivalent summer blockbuster, not a work of art. From what I've heard of the gameplay improvements in ME3, it looks like it's just fine in that category.

And after reading the quotes more carefully it doesn't seem like it's as bad as first perceived. With all the gameplay imrpovements being made in ME3, and the fact that ME2 had strong enough (through somewhat unrefined) gameplay, of course the natural step forward would be better narrative.

Modifié par Bcuz, 23 août 2011 - 12:21 .

[slimgrin]

I just love how Bioware's wonderful pr brings the community together...

[Nozybidaj]

javierabegazo wrote...

...snip...

What exactly do those comments, or BW games in general, have to do with the rpg genre?