235 réponses à ce sujet

[Jonathan Shepard]

It'd be very hard to have different types of combat besides gunning things down in Me3... kinda because you're fighting giant mechanical space Cthulus...

It's a little different than a government/company conspiracy story...

[Apocsapel91]

I think the story is great in both games, but I prefer the Mass Effect Story. The game play is great in both games, but I prefer Deus Ex: Human Revolution. The conversation system is great in both games, but I prefer Deus Ex: Human Revolution (I like having to work to persuade people or buying the augment (but even with the augment, it still requires more work than the Mass Effect paragon/renegade persuade option (and yes it's parenthesisception))).

[CaptainSpandex]

 The reason the comparison between the two is apt is because Deus Ex: HR's success essentially proves BioWare's recent shift in design philosophy wrong on a number of fronts.

They've argued with - and even at times antagonized - their fanbase for suggesting that if Mass Effect were more of an RPG, if it had a little more depth, it would be an even better game. They have suggested that such a game isn't enough of an 'evolution' to be commercially viable. They even inserted a little gag in ME2 just to deride that mentality. (The video game salesman in the Citadel who says "I miss real RPGs where you had to remember to drink water and walked everywhere in real-time, blah blah blah...") Their response to the fans clamoring for more RPG elements was to put customizable weapons back in the game. That's it. At least, of what has been shown, thus far. Mike Laidlaw obviously was more than a little antagonistic when faced with the public's disapproval of DA2, and the ownership of BioWare also fueled the anti-RPG fan rhetoric recently.

But here is Deus Ex: Human Revolution. A very deep, very nuanced hybrid RPG that is essentially a product of the same late-90s/early-00s PC gaming philosophy that BioWare has lately gone out of their way to eschew on a regular basis... and thanks to a sizable marketing push and positive word of mouth, it's on top of the sales charts. And in strong contention for Game of the Year.

It's a perfectly relevant comparison.

Modifié par CaptainSpandex, 02 septembre 2011 - 04:20 .

[TheKillerAngel]

CaptainSpandex wrote...

 The reason the comparison between the two is apt is because Deus Ex: HR's success essentially proves BioWare's recent shift in design philosophy wrong on a number of fronts.

They've argued with - and even at times antagonized - their fanbase for suggesting that if Mass Effect were more of an RPG, if it had a little more depth, it would be an even better game. They have suggested that such a game isn't enough of an 'evolution' to be commercially viable. They even inserted a little gag in ME2 just to deride that mentality. (The video game salesman in the Citadel who says "I miss real RPGs where you had to remember to drink water and walked everywhere in real-time, blah blah blah...") Their response to the fans clamoring for more RPG elements was to put customizable weapons back in the game. That's it. At least, of what has been shown, thus far. Mike Laidlaw obviously was more than a little antagonistic when faced with the public's disapproval of DA2, and the ownership of BioWare also fueled the anti-RPG fan rhetoric recently.

But here is Deus Ex: Human Revolution. A very deep, very nuanced hybrid RPG that is essentially a product of the same late-90s/early-00s PC gaming philosophy that BioWare has lately gone out of their way to eschew on a regular basis... and thanks to a sizable marketing push and positive word of mouth, it's on top of the sales charts. And in strong contention for Game of the Year.

It's a perfectly relevant comparison.

I don't think DX:HR's success mean BW is "wrong." Games can be successful by pursuing different methods.

[CaptainSpandex]

No, I didn't mean they were 'wrong' in that 'what they're doing isn't working'. Mass Effect is doing quite well. They're certainly 'right on' in that regard.

I mean that they're wrong when they've suggested in interviews that these kind of games don't have a place in the modern market. DX:HR's success shows that it's commercially viable, and that the fans suggesting that more RPG elements wouldn't decrease Mass Effect's commercial appeal were spot on.

Modifié par CaptainSpandex, 02 septembre 2011 - 04:26 .

[sedrikhcain]

CaptainSpandex wrote...

 The reason the comparison between the two is apt is because Deus Ex: HR's success essentially proves BioWare's recent shift in design philosophy wrong on a number of fronts.

They've argued with - and even at times antagonized - their fanbase for suggesting that if Mass Effect were more of an RPG, if it had a little more depth, it would be an even better game. They have suggested that such a game isn't enough of an 'evolution' to be commercially viable. They even inserted a little gag in ME2 just to deride that mentality. (The video game salesman in the Citadel who says "I miss real RPGs where you had to remember to drink water and walked everywhere in real-time, blah blah blah...") Their response to the fans clamoring for more RPG elements was to put customizable weapons back in the game. That's it. At least, of what has been shown, thus far. Mike Laidlaw obviously was more than a little antagonistic when faced with the public's disapproval of DA2, and the ownership of BioWare also fueled the anti-RPG fan rhetoric recently.

But here is Deus Ex: Human Revolution. A very deep, very nuanced hybrid RPG that is essentially a product of the same late-90s/early-00s PC gaming philosophy that BioWare has lately gone out of their way to eschew on a regular basis... and thanks to a sizable marketing push and positive word of mouth, it's on top of the sales charts. And in strong contention for Game of the Year.

It's a perfectly relevant comparison.

I don't think there is a wrong or right here. ME is its own series and so is DX. Each has its own path. Show me where BioWare ever said "You can't make a good game with lots of traditional RPG elements prominently featured".

[sedrikhcain]

CaptainSpandex wrote...

No, I didn't mean they were 'wrong' in that 'what they're doing isn't working'. Mass Effect is doing quite well. They're certainly 'right on' in that regard.

I mean that they're wrong when they've suggested in interviews that these kind of games don't have a place in the modern market. DX:HR's success shows that it's commercially viable, and that the fans suggesting that more RPG elements wouldn't decrease Mass Effect's commercial appeal were spot on.

The problem i've always had with this is the inherent suggestion that ME1 was traditional rpg.

[aridor1570]

sympathy4saren wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

Well, the other person's thread was locked, probably due to the inflammatory title and offensive wording, but I felt that he had some good points, and that this deserves to be discussed properly. 

When Bioware made Mass Effect 2 they simplified many of the RPG features, focusing on improving the combat, but then Deus: Ex Human revolution comes out with not only a better cover-based combat system, but better RPG features as well.

It has a dialogue system that allows you to justify your actions however you want, while Mass Effect's always tells you whether or not what your doing is right or wrong. It also makes you think carefully about what you choose, and the conversations matter. 

The cover system is much better, and allows you to be stealthy as well as direct. The inventory isn't a pain like Mass Effect 1's, and gives you far more customisation and choices than ME2. 

You can upgrade yourself and your weapons to a far greater extent than Mass Effect 2.

It's popular and praised despite being fairly complex, and I think that it really has put Mass Effect to shame. Other than a few issues I had with it (The ending didn't have enough closure with certain characters, and you couldn't customise Adam and make him more your character) I'm really worried that Mass Effect 3 won't be half the game it is. 

Mass Effect 3 will have third person shooter combat in narrow hallways. Has this sunk in yet and caused worry?

Yes it has and no it didn't, that is what ME is, and Deus Ex is what it is.

[M33T SH33LD]

I have yet to play Deus Ex: HR, however I can tell from looking at images and concept art and listening to the soundtrack numerous, numerous times that the artistic design of Deus Ex stomps the sh!t out of Mass Effect (More specifically ME2)  when it comes to character, environment, and music design (etc.)  Which makes me sad, because I loved the design in ME1 and very much disliked a lot of it in ME2.  Especially the music.... fake strings should be banned from everything.

[Massadonious1]

I think they're comparable in the basic sense, but they're clearly not meant to be played in the same way. Mass Effect has never pretended to be anything but a pew pew shooter. The only difference between the first two titles is they got rid of the stat based approach.

And personally, I think it would ruin the mythos of Shepard as a soldier (and the scope of the conflict as a whole) if he/she started acting like Solid Snake.

[sevach]

CaptainSpandex wrote...

 The reason the comparison between the two is apt is because Deus Ex: HR's success essentially proves BioWare's recent shift in design philosophy wrong on a number of fronts.

They've argued with - and even at times antagonized - their fanbase for suggesting that if Mass Effect were more of an RPG, if it had a little more depth, it would be an even better game. They have suggested that such a game isn't enough of an 'evolution' to be commercially viable. They even inserted a little gag in ME2 just to deride that mentality. (The video game salesman in the Citadel who says "I miss real RPGs where you had to remember to drink water and walked everywhere in real-time, blah blah blah...") Their response to the fans clamoring for more RPG elements was to put customizable weapons back in the game. That's it. At least, of what has been shown, thus far. Mike Laidlaw obviously was more than a little antagonistic when faced with the public's disapproval of DA2, and the ownership of BioWare also fueled the anti-RPG fan rhetoric recently.

But here is Deus Ex: Human Revolution. A very deep, very nuanced hybrid RPG that is essentially a product of the same late-90s/early-00s PC gaming philosophy that BioWare has lately gone out of their way to eschew on a regular basis... and thanks to a sizable marketing push and positive word of mouth, it's on top of the sales charts. And in strong contention for Game of the Year.

It's a perfectly relevant comparison.

I must say, you make a very good point.

[AtreiyaN7]

sedrikhcain wrote...

Jayce F wrote...

Sister Helen wrote...

Great. Another amazing game where I, once AGAIN, cannot play a girl.

I AM a girl. Is it too much to ask for game writers and developers to understand that girls want to play characters that look like them?

Hell and horsefeathers, I'd be willing to settle for an androgynous guy with a braid or long hair.

No, I don't think they should. Some stories would be far too watered down or become too incoherent  if the game in question allowed you to pick a character's gender. It's not always an issue but some stories benefit from having a predefined protagonist.

Besides, it's speaks to your level of maturity if you can play a character who is pretty far removed from yourself.

I had no problem playing Cate Archer. You shouldn't have a problem playing Adam Jensen.

That really is a bunch of bologna. 99% of the games you want to play, as a man, give you that option. It's 180 degrees different if you are a woman. My approach to solving this issue differs from Sister Helen's but this high-handed "get over it" reaction to women gamers who complain about  their lack of representation doesn't make us men look good.

As a female gamer here with her XX chromosomes, I'm sort of irked by the whole "Oh no, it's ANOTHER game where I don't get to play as a female!!!" thing from other women. I'm actually kind of inclined to say "get over it" to fellow women complaining about Adam Jensen and other set male protagonists. In a game like DE:HR or the Splinter Cell series, I think it's perfeclty valid to have a set male protagonist because of the nature of the stories. If I, as a woman, am going to play an ex-Navy SEAL turned NSA operative (aka Sam Fisher in Splinter Cell), I can deal with it because I think the nature of the story and character demand it from my perspective. I also think the pool of female SEALs is, oh, non-existent.

As for DE:HR, if I'm Adam Jensen - whose story is in part tied to his relationship with Megan Reed - then I can accept that as being important to the story being told and how they want to tell it. I don't take the fact that the protagonist is male as some kind of personal affront, nor do I view it as a slight by the devs or as some sort of indication that devs don't care about female gamers.

I always jump at the chance to play a female character when presented with the opportunity, but I'm mature enough to realize that sometimes the story and character take precedence over my desire to play as a female. I have quite a few games, like the assorted BW & Bethesda games, where I can choose to play as a female. The fact that the protagonist is a male in DE:HR shouldn't prevent other women from playing and enjoying the game, unless they're fixated on playing as their own gender, in which case I wonder how they get by in such a cruel, cruel gaming world.

[aridor1570]

CaptainSpandex wrote...

 The reason the comparison between the two is apt is because Deus Ex: HR's success essentially proves BioWare's recent shift in design philosophy wrong on a number of fronts.

I've stopped reading at that point, ME2 and it's diraction was more successful than DX:HR thus far.

[sedrikhcain]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

As a female gamer here with her XX chromosomes, I'm sort of irked by the whole "Oh no, it's ANOTHER game where I don't get to play as a female!!!" thing from other women. I'm actually kind of inclined to say "get over it" to fellow women complaining about Adam Jensen and other set male protagonists. In a game like DE:HR or the Splinter Cell series, I think it's perfeclty valid to have a set male protagonist because of the nature of the stories. If I, as a woman, am going to play an ex-Navy SEAL turned NSA operative (aka Sam Fisher in Splinter Cell), I can deal with it because I think the nature of the story and character demand it from my perspective. I also think the pool of female SEALs is, oh, non-existent.

As for DE:HR, if I'm Adam Jensen - whose story is in part tied to his relationship with Megan Reed - then I can accept that as being important to the story being told and how they want to tell it. I don't take the fact that the protagonist is male as some kind of personal affront, nor do I view it as a slight by the devs or as some sort of indication that devs don't care about female gamers.

I always jump at the chance to play a female character when presented with the opportunity, but I'm mature enough to realize that sometimes the story and character take precedence over my desire to play as a female. I have quite a few games, like the assorted BW & Bethesda games, where I can choose to play as a female. The fact that the protagonist is a male in DE:HR shouldn't prevent other women from playing and enjoying the game, unless they're fixated on playing as their own gender, in which case I wonder how they get by in such a cruel, cruel gaming world.

Clearly it doesn't bother you but it does bother a lot of women and they're consumers just like you. Personally, I can relate to some of the arguments and others I can't (lack of more female PCs, I get, complaining about big boobs and skimpy outfits? Not so much) But, did you see my other post a little further down on this thread? I don't want to start twisting developers' arms to do things they don't want to do, I want to make the pool of developers much more diverse and inclusive.

[Epic777]

I do not believe the comparisons are relevant to the extent that people press on.

Why not relevant? Deus Ex as a series is more than a simple Action-RPG or RPG hybrid. It has elements of RPGs, Action, Adventure and FPS genres. The stories are built on conspiracies. This ranges from the illuninati to the knights templar. Its a cyberpunk world with augmented agents, corruption officals, poweful AI's etc. The world of Deus Ex has more in common with Ghost in the Shell. In contrast ME's world is more a mirror of Star Wars. The thing that makes Deus Ex so special is the freedom it a allowed in completing the actual tasks. It encoraged emergent gameplay. In the oringal game I can remember using the the regeneration aug to overcome my lack of swimming skills (Essentially swim indefinatly). In HR I beat a boss by dragging in a hacked turret.

Much has been said about the RPG elements of HR. For me the concentration should be how it achieves those elements. HR doesn't have alot of numbers or traditional stats as it doesn't need them. Attributes are no where to be found. HR doesn't have the tier system for weapons like the elder scrolls series or ME1. Also HR has a gentle curve; the player doesn't go from not being able to hit the broadside of an elephants backside to sniping insects a mile away (traditional RPG style). Jenson is a competent shot from the start. However without the dental armor upgrade he's essentailly made of glass. The recoil-less aug makes weapons such as the minigun far more effective. In that way RPG style progression is made but not through traditional means that would not have suited the game.

[Jayce]

sedrikhcain wrote...

That really is a bunch of bologna. 99% of the games you want to play, as a man, give you that option. It's 180 degrees different if you are a woman. My approach to solving this issue differs from Sister Helen's but this high-handed "get over it" reaction to women gamers who complain about  their lack of representation doesn't make us men look good.

No it isn't. Sister Helen, made a perfectly valid grumble about not being able to play as a female character in HR, I made a perfectly valid counter that predefined characters are just as good as user defined ones and it would silly to sacrifice what that brings to a game, in every game just to please everyone.
 
The gender issue is one facet of a bigger debate; Player choice vs storytelling. The two are not mutually exclusive but the more of the character you hand over to the player the more nebulous the story has to be to accomodate the different choices and not every story is tellable in that manner.

[javierabegazo]

Guys, if you want to talk about Genders in Video Games, open another a thread in the off topic forum. Bring discussion back to DE and ME3 or this will get closed.

[CaptainSpandex]

lightsnow13 wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

CaptainSpandex wrote...

No, I didn't mean they were 'wrong' in that 'what they're doing isn't working'. Mass Effect is doing quite well. They're certainly 'right on' in that regard.

I mean that they're wrong when they've suggested in interviews that these kind of games don't have a place in the modern market. DX:HR's success shows that it's commercially viable, and that the fans suggesting that more RPG elements wouldn't decrease Mass Effect's commercial appeal were spot on.

The problem i've always had with this is the inherent suggestion that ME1 was traditional rpg.

Oh nostalgia... how you can alter perceptions.

I agree. ME1 was never a traditional RPG.

Both of you insinuated that yourselves, though. I never said it was. Mass Effect 1 wasn't a traditional RPG, I agree. BUT... I will say that Mass Effect was more of an RPG with Third-Person-Shooter elements... and Mass Effect 2 was a Third-Person Shooter with light RPG elements.

Modifié par CaptainSpandex, 02 septembre 2011 - 06:19 .

[littlezack]

lightsnow13 wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

CaptainSpandex wrote...

No, I didn't mean they were 'wrong' in that 'what they're doing isn't working'. Mass Effect is doing quite well. They're certainly 'right on' in that regard.

I mean that they're wrong when they've suggested in interviews that these kind of games don't have a place in the modern market. DX:HR's success shows that it's commercially viable, and that the fans suggesting that more RPG elements wouldn't decrease Mass Effect's commercial appeal were spot on.

The problem i've always had with this is the inherent suggestion that ME1 was traditional rpg.

Oh nostalgia... how you can alter perceptions.

I agree. ME1 was never a traditional RPG.

 I think a lot of people forget that Bioware's always been willing to play loose with the way they make games and define the genre. Mass Effect 2 is not the first game they made that was relatively light on RPG elements - years before, they had Jade Empire. Few stats, little customization of any kind, very different from their previous work. They're willing to experiment and not be bound by what is and isn't considered to be an RPG - they do what they consider to be a good game.

Now, as far as DX goes, while I do like it, my issue is with people acting like it's some triumph of RPG history, that it's mere existence somehow shames ME - it's a great game, and there are some things it does better than ME, but there are quite a few things it does worse, too. At the end of the day, they're two different games with two different design philosophies and two different goals. In my book, the only thing that merits real comparison is their dialogue systems.

[sedrikhcain]

CaptainSpandex wrote...

lightsnow13 wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

CaptainSpandex wrote...

No, I didn't mean they were 'wrong' in that 'what they're doing isn't working'. Mass Effect is doing quite well. They're certainly 'right on' in that regard.

I mean that they're wrong when they've suggested in interviews that these kind of games don't have a place in the modern market. DX:HR's success shows that it's commercially viable, and that the fans suggesting that more RPG elements wouldn't decrease Mass Effect's commercial appeal were spot on.

The problem i've always had with this is the inherent suggestion that ME1 was traditional rpg.

Oh nostalgia... how you can alter perceptions.

I agree. ME1 was never a traditional RPG.

Both of you insinuated that yourselves, though. I never said it was. Mass Effect 1 wasn't a traditional RPG, I agree. BUT... I will say that Mass Effect was more of an RPG with Third-Person-Shooter elements... and Mass Effect 2 was a Third-Person Shooter with light RPG elements.

I haven't insinuated anything because my statement was very direct. Maybe you mean to say that I infered something that isn't there. But to just skip past all that..the bottom line is that it seems strange to bemoan the loss of traditional rpg elements from something that was light on them from the start. To hear many of he complaints around this issue, you would think ME1 was Neverwinter Nights or something. It seems some perspective has been lost along the way.

[snfonseka]

Gameplay is totally different. It is hard to implement (hard, not impossible) different gameplay styles like DE: HR in ME3, because it is "squad base".

[Baiolit]

While I understand the OP's opinion I disagree with his reasons. I find them a bit convoluted. Deus Ex: Human Revolution barely qualifies as an RPG and to say its RPG elements are deeper than Mass Effect's lacks basis on fact. The RPG elements are different and in DE:HR's case diluted.

Customization: Here I believe Deus Ex: Human Revolution loses. Mass Effect 2 allows you to upgrade guns, your character, and customize that character. Not being able to design him/her is a huge minus and is detrimental to a player's immersion.(This is how I feel, others might disagree)

Deus Ex allows the upgrades but in a different, non-traditional matter. Especially when it came to character growth. And one of the negatives with that is that the augmentations tree had no means of informing a player how often or how "viable", or even how much utillity an augmentation might have. Well I enjoy challenges and don't want to be spoonfed, I like to see numbers and stats to a certain extent so I can gauge the power of an ability.

By now it must have been realized that I am an avid Mass Effect fan and it looks like I'm bashing Deus Ex. I just feel the need to express my opinion, however biased. Even the gameplay to me was nothing spectacular. I found the A.I. to be less than stellar, often hiding at the 181st/359th degree in regards to their body position/field of view often remaining unnoticed. Simple traps and repetitive methods allows one to breeze through the game on the highest difficulty.

In story telling there is no comparison. From my own impressions, and many reviews both by fans and professionals, I have derived that the plot is lackluster in this game. Mass Effect strongest point was its plot line, and the emotional attchment one develops over time.

What it boils down to is that Mass Effect remains focused and polished, while DE:HR blends cookie cutter game elements in an attempt to please everyone. A dull and generic main character, a growth tree similar in fashion to that of an acion/aventure game, a predictable plot, all are traits belonging to a game that carries the blunt scent of moldy wood, not the reliable musk of old hickory one could associate with a traditional RPG.

[In Exile]

Cutlass Jack wrote...
In my opinion, it has far less replay value. Not because there isn't a zillion ways to do things, but rather that you can do most of it on a single playthrough. Specifically you get so many Praxis points by game's end that you aren't making any hard choices on upgrades. Secondly they set it up in an odd way that lets you see all four possible endings one one playthrough.

A lot of that was a nod to the original.Not the praxis spam, but certainly the end was a lot like DX.