164 réponses à ce sujet

[tetrisblock4x1]

LGTX wrote...

Because they try to evolve role-playing into actual role-playing, as opposed to stat-crunching and defining character professions and skillsets. It's just RPG evolution, nothing is wrong with not 'getting it'. But Bioware won't admit anything to you just because you disagree.

Yeah, I must say it was a good idea to make Shepard nothing but a space marine. Having Bioware removing the "stealthy ninja" style from the game, and coloring the "war mangering marine" options in red and the "peaceful diplomat" in blue, and putting the two of them at a 100% success which is independent of any of the players build, history, or previous relations was an excellent idea! Now I can be emotionally engaged without any of this archaic, outdated rubbish which require some kind of foreplanning and investigation getting in the way of my desired outcome to the situations which the game puts me through.

Modifié par tetrisblock4x1, 03 décembre 2011 - 12:05 .

[Candidate 88766]

jreezy wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...
*snip*
I wish all developers were like this with game design - using mechanics that are suited to that individual game as opposed to using mechanics just for the sake of calling it a shooter or an RPG, which in the end are just arbitrary titles.

A good game is a good game regardless of genre.

I agree with everything before the snipping but this caught my attention since I'm studying game design now. Like you said, when designing a game, genre should never come into play as you go about developing a game. It causes unnecessary hindrances to a designer's creative process. Make a game how you want to make it without worrying about, as you said, arbitrary titles. BioWare's design philosophy seems like Game Design 101 to me.

The industry could use more people that think like you imo. If developers keep making games that rigidly stick to some kind of genre checklist then the industry will stagnate. Games like Minecraft or Limbo or even ME1/ME2 would never have existed if developers didn't decide to just make a game and not worry about what shelf it would be put on in the shops.

[twisty77]

If you don't like it, don't play the game.

Plain and simple.

[LGTX]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Because they try to evolve role-playing into actual role-playing, as opposed to stat-crunching and defining character professions and skillsets. It's just RPG evolution, nothing is wrong with not 'getting it'. But Bioware won't admit anything to you just because you disagree.

Yeah, I must say it was a good idea to make Shepard nothing but a space marine. Having Bioware removing the "stealthy ninja" style from the game, and coloring the "war mangering marine" options in red and the "peaceful diplomat" in blue, and putting the two of them at a 100% success which is independent of any of the players build, history, or previous relations was an excellent idea! Now I can be emotionally engaged without any of this archaic, outdated rubbish which require some kind of foreplanning and investigation getting in the way of my desired outcome to the situations which the game puts me through.

In order to remove something from a game, it must first be there. And like I said, it's normal to disagree with what they did, but they are not admitting anything to you.

[tetrisblock4x1]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

jreezy wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...
*snip*
I wish all developers were like this with game design - using mechanics that are suited to that individual game as opposed to using mechanics just for the sake of calling it a shooter or an RPG, which in the end are just arbitrary titles.

A good game is a good game regardless of genre.

I agree with everything before the snipping but this caught my attention since I'm studying game design now. Like you said, when designing a game, genre should never come into play as you go about developing a game. It causes unnecessary hindrances to a designer's creative process. Make a game how you want to make it without worrying about, as you said, arbitrary titles. BioWare's design philosophy seems like Game Design 101 to me.

The industry could use more people that think like you imo. If developers keep making games that rigidly stick to some kind of genre checklist then the industry will stagnate

Too late. If you hadn't figured out by now, I rate the "RPG factor" of a game based on how open it is to different choices and methods. Other major titles of this year apart from Bioware include Deus Ex and Skyrim, and they're both clearly been less open to choice than the predecessors, and if they follow industry trends they'll only keep on downsizing everything

[Kajeet]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Because they try to evolve role-playing into actual role-playing, as opposed to stat-crunching and defining character professions and skillsets. It's just RPG evolution, nothing is wrong with not 'getting it'. But Bioware won't admit anything to you just because you disagree.

Yeah, I must say it was a good idea to make Shepard nothing but a space marine. Having Bioware removing the "stealthy ninja" style from the game, and coloring the "war mangering marine" options in red and the "peaceful diplomat" in blue, and putting the two of them at a 100% success which is independent of any of the players build, history, or previous relations was an excellent idea! Now I can be emotionally engaged without any of this archaic, outdated rubbish which require some kind of foreplanning and investigation getting in the way of my desired outcome to the situations which the game puts me through.

*hem hem* first off you DO in fact need to have 'previous relations' BEFORE you get the blue and red lines of dialog, if you act good then you can unlock the 100% success rate for the good dialog, same for the bad dialog. And by the time you max any of those out you are almost done with that particular play through. in ME1 the stat carries over, like many rpgs where your stats carry over with you when you begin a new game. In ME2 you restart with the paragon and renegade points thus again, requiring you to go good or bad.

What this all means? What your complaining about IS in fact there and I'm starting to wonder how much you've actually played this game to begin with. Not to mention the whole "stealthy ninja" style isn't used in most jrpgs which is where the entire genre of rpg itself comes from.

Now that I have that out of the way lets put this to rest. What does it take for a game to be an rpg?
-  first off story, a rpg that doesn't have an emphasis on story and characters isn't an rpg at all.
- second, an rpg needs to have some sort of customization
- thirdly, it needs to have experience points or something similar and some form of currency to buy and sell goods taken from missions, enemies, and things that are similar.
- fourth, choice, either via a branching off of skills, or deciding whether I should focus on long range combat, short range combat, and buffing, or actually choices in game that decides the rest of the game (save party member a or b, follow route 1 or route 2, kill guy or let him live) these choices must change the rest of the game

Those are the basics of the basics for a game to be considered an rpg, they need ALL of those to be considered an rpg.

last I checked, and the Mass Effect has every single one of those.

Ergo in conclusion, you sir have no idea just what the frak you're talking about.

[tetrisblock4x1]

Kajeet wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Because they try to evolve role-playing into actual role-playing, as opposed to stat-crunching and defining character professions and skillsets. It's just RPG evolution, nothing is wrong with not 'getting it'. But Bioware won't admit anything to you just because you disagree.

Yeah, I must say it was a good idea to make Shepard nothing but a space marine. Having Bioware removing the "stealthy ninja" style from the game, and coloring the "war mangering marine" options in red and the "peaceful diplomat" in blue, and putting the two of them at a 100% success which is independent of any of the players build, history, or previous relations was an excellent idea! Now I can be emotionally engaged without any of this archaic, outdated rubbish which require some kind of foreplanning and investigation getting in the way of my desired outcome to the situations which the game puts me through.

*hem hem* first off you DO in fact need to have 'previous relations' BEFORE you get the blue and red lines of dialog, if you act good then you can unlock the 100% success rate for the good dialog, same for the bad dialog. And by the time you max any of those out you are almost done with that particular play through. in ME1 the stat carries over, like many rpgs where your stats carry over with you when you begin a new game. In ME2 you restart with the paragon and renegade points thus again, requiring you to go good or bad.

What this all means? What your complaining about IS in fact there and I'm starting to wonder how much you've actually played this game to begin with. Not to mention the whole "stealthy ninja" style isn't used in most jrpgs which is where the entire genre of rpg itself comes from.

Now that I have that out of the way lets put this to rest. What does it take for a game to be an rpg?
-  first off story, a rpg that doesn't have an emphasis on story and characters isn't an rpg at all.
- second, an rpg needs to have some sort of customization
- thirdly, it needs to have experience points or something similar and some form of currency to buy and sell goods taken from missions, enemies, and things that are similar.
- fourth, choice, either via a branching off of skills, or deciding whether I should focus on long range combat, short range combat, and buffing, or actually choices in game that decides the rest of the game (save party member a or b, follow route 1 or route 2, kill guy or let him live) these choices must change the rest of the game

Those are the basics of the basics for a game to be considered an rpg, they need ALL of those to be considered an rpg.

last I checked, and the Mass Effect has every single one of those.

Ergo in conclusion, you sir have no idea just what the frak you're talking about.

Look at Fallout. Then look back at Mass Effect. Then look at Fallout 2. Then look back at Mass Effect. Then look at System shock 2. Then Mass Effect. Then Deus Ex 1. And back again. I've played enough RPGs to know what Mass Effect is missing, have you?

[Candidate 88766]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Too late. If you hadn't figured out by now, I rate the "RPG factor" of a game based on how open it is to different choices and methods. Other major titles of this year apart from Bioware include Deus Ex and Skyrim, and they're both clearly been less open to choice than the predecessors, and if they follow industry trends they'll only keep on downsizing everything

So if it isn't a freeform open-world RPG - regardless of whether that is relevant to the style of game or the story - its not a good game in your eyes?

[tetrisblock4x1]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Too late. If you hadn't figured out by now, I rate the "RPG factor" of a game based on how open it is to different choices and methods. Other major titles of this year apart from Bioware include Deus Ex and Skyrim, and they're both clearly been less open to choice than the predecessors, and if they follow industry trends they'll only keep on downsizing everything

So if it isn't a freeform open-world RPG - regardless of whether that is relevant to the style of game or the story - its not a good game in your eyes?

Yeah, that's exactly what I meant. How did you know?

[Candidate 88766]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Look at Fallout. Then look back at Mass Effect. Then look at Fallout 2. Then look back at Mass Effect. Then look at System shock 2. Then Mass Effect. Then Deus Ex 1. And back again. I've played enough RPGs to know what Mass Effect is missing, have you?

Mass Effect is not, and never was, trying to be the same style of game as those. Mass Effect would only be missing those things if they were necessary for the ME games to be good, and as ME1 and ME2 proved they don't need those 'missing' things in order to be good games, so I don't see what point you're making.

Okay, so Bioware doesn't make traditional RPGs. They don't say that they do - they go out of their way to use the terms hybrid and action-RPG so people will understand that they are not trying to make traditional RPGs. Why is that so hard to understand? 

[Candidate 88766]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Too late. If you hadn't figured out by now, I rate the "RPG factor" of a game based on how open it is to different choices and methods. Other major titles of this year apart from Bioware include Deus Ex and Skyrim, and they're both clearly been less open to choice than the predecessors, and if they follow industry trends they'll only keep on downsizing everything

So if it isn't a freeform open-world RPG - regardless of whether that is relevant to the style of game or the story - its not a good game in your eyes?

Yeah, that's exactly what I meant. How did you know?

Really? Any game that isn't open world isn't good in your opinion?

If that is the case, then you don't think ME games are good. And in that case, why do you stick around on this forum? Not trying to be confrontational, but surely you have better things to do than frequent a forum dedicated to game that doesn't meet your requirements for a 'good' game?

Also, if you do feel that way about games then Saints Row 3 is really good - it takes open world gameplay toan extreme. You can pretty much do whatever you want. Its fantastic, and if you're serious in what you said then I would genuinely recommend it to you. I'd probably rate it as 2nd or 3rd best game of the year, behind Skyrim and possibly Arkham City.

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 03 décembre 2011 - 12:54 .

[DeathDragon185]

when people admit that whatever the genre is, RPG MEANS NOTHING are you a fan of shooters, like 3rd person cover shooters and games with good stories then mass effect series is for you. if not then don't go making silly irrelevant threads that won't change anything but wasting peoples time.(im bored right now). I swear I wish the term RPG never existed and just call them "adventure games".

[Savber100]

*shrugs*

Bioware has always been a game developer. The label of RPG developer was set by people who were ignorant enough to believe that Bioware would stay in a single genre.

So big deal... I don't care if Bioware makes good RPGs as long as they make good games.

Modifié par Savber100, 03 décembre 2011 - 01:02 .

[DCarter]

I don't know why people get so defensive about this topic. Mass Effect isn't an RPG (mass effect 2 certainly isn't, me1 is more debatable), the bread and butter gameplay is a third person shooter. If you want to differentiate it from other third person shooters you could call it a "story driven third person shooter" to acknowledge the interactive cutscenes which make up the other major portion of the gameplay. This doesn't make it a bad game.

Modifié par DCarter, 03 décembre 2011 - 12:56 .

[Kajeet]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Kajeet wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

LGTX wrote...

Because they try to evolve role-playing into actual role-playing, as opposed to stat-crunching and defining character professions and skillsets. It's just RPG evolution, nothing is wrong with not 'getting it'. But Bioware won't admit anything to you just because you disagree.

Yeah, I must say it was a good idea to make Shepard nothing but a space marine. Having Bioware removing the "stealthy ninja" style from the game, and coloring the "war mangering marine" options in red and the "peaceful diplomat" in blue, and putting the two of them at a 100% success which is independent of any of the players build, history, or previous relations was an excellent idea! Now I can be emotionally engaged without any of this archaic, outdated rubbish which require some kind of foreplanning and investigation getting in the way of my desired outcome to the situations which the game puts me through.

*hem hem* first off you DO in fact need to have 'previous relations' BEFORE you get the blue and red lines of dialog, if you act good then you can unlock the 100% success rate for the good dialog, same for the bad dialog. And by the time you max any of those out you are almost done with that particular play through. in ME1 the stat carries over, like many rpgs where your stats carry over with you when you begin a new game. In ME2 you restart with the paragon and renegade points thus again, requiring you to go good or bad.

What this all means? What your complaining about IS in fact there and I'm starting to wonder how much you've actually played this game to begin with. Not to mention the whole "stealthy ninja" style isn't used in most jrpgs which is where the entire genre of rpg itself comes from.

Now that I have that out of the way lets put this to rest. What does it take for a game to be an rpg?
-  first off story, a rpg that doesn't have an emphasis on story and characters isn't an rpg at all.
- second, an rpg needs to have some sort of customization
- thirdly, it needs to have experience points or something similar and some form of currency to buy and sell goods taken from missions, enemies, and things that are similar.
- fourth, choice, either via a branching off of skills, or deciding whether I should focus on long range combat, short range combat, and buffing, or actually choices in game that decides the rest of the game (save party member a or b, follow route 1 or route 2, kill guy or let him live) these choices must change the rest of the game

Those are the basics of the basics for a game to be considered an rpg, they need ALL of those to be considered an rpg.

last I checked, and the Mass Effect has every single one of those.

Ergo in conclusion, you sir have no idea just what the frak you're talking about.

Look at Fallout. Then look back at Mass Effect. Then look at Fallout 2. Then look back at Mass Effect. Then look at System shock 2. Then Mass Effect. Then Deus Ex 1. And back again. I've played enough RPGs to know what Mass Effect is missing, have you?

What? Mass Effect has plenty of free roam too, at least as much free roam as the final fantasy games, chrono trigger, breath of fire, and star wars kotor.

How about the rpgs that ARE linear, fire emblem, Super Robot Wars, xenosaga.

You don't know what constitutes an rpg do you?

Modifié par Kajeet, 03 décembre 2011 - 01:02 .

[Candidate 88766]

Savber100 wrote...

*shrugs*

Bioware has always been a game developer. The label of RPG developer was set by people who were ignorant enough to believe that Bioware would stay in a single genre.

So big deal... I don't care if Bioware makes good RPGs as long as they make good game.

Bingo.

Like I said on the previous page, a good game is a good game.

Genres are there to help people know which shelf to put the games on in a shop. They shouldn't be rigid structures for game development.

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Basically it's like this: You start at character creation and you choose what kind of a weapon you want to kill people with. You level that weapon up with an additional ability or two among heaps of numerical upgrades that basically serve to make the game easier. And then you proceed to play a game which emphasises combat as the be all and end all solution to every problem in the game and are rewarded with darkside/light side points based on whichever dialog hyperlink you click on preceeding the combat.

If you want to play a character in any Bioware game and you want the character to be good at stealth (a few seconds of cloak in the middle of a hundred unskippable firefights doesn't count), diplomacy, trading, sagotage, trapping, repairs, science, or anything that is not shooting, well, you won't find it in any of Biowares new games. "B-b-but the dialog options, but [aragon/renegade, but customization of appearance and story" but NOTHING. You play the role of a space marine, and nothing more. I can think of a number of open world games from this year which have at least some options, morality and story choice, but I don't see anyone calling Arkham City or Saints row 3 RPGs, and why would anyone call them that? Why is Biowares Mass Effect the exception?

Reference the original Fallout and fallout 2 if you can't think of any RPGs of the type I've just described.

Pleased to learn that D&D during convention isn't RPG.

[DeathDragon185]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Bioware tells stories through games. That is what they've always done - put story ahead of gameplay and genre.

It just so happens that the easiest way to tell stories in games in the way Bioware wants to is through RPGs, or games that feature some traditional RPG features. That doesn't mean that every game Bioware makes has to adhere to some arbitrary game features checklist so it can be called an RPG. They realised with ME that while choices and customization suit the game, traditional RPG combat simply doesn't fit so they decided to use TPS mechanics.

Thats what Bioware does - they create stories and then choose gameplay mechanics that best serve that story, rather than choosing gameplay mechanics based on genre. I wish all developers were like this with game design - using mechanics that are suited to that individual game as opposed to using mechanics just for the sake of calling it a shooter or an RPG, which in the end are just arbitrary titles.

A good game is a good game regardless of genre.

somebody give you a ****ing medal already:innocent:

[DCarter]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

*shrugs*

Bioware has always been a game developer. The label of RPG developer was set by people who were ignorant enough to believe that Bioware would stay in a single genre.

So big deal... I don't care if Bioware makes good RPGs as long as they make good game.

Bingo.

Like I said on the previous page, a good game is a good game.

Genres are there to help people know which shelf to put the games on in a shop. They shouldn't be rigid structures for game development.

I agree but i still wish people would stop describing mass effect 2 as an RPG because it isn't. Mass effect 1 they can get away with. 

[TomY90]

They don't make RPG's and the traditional RPG is dying off slowly anyway, they are nowadays become a mix of games for instance mass effect is an Action RPG which they said that whilst developing mass effect 1.

Skyrim and the fallout series is not true RPG either they are now becoming adventure games with RPG mixed with it, deus ex is the same as well.

it is just how the game industry is nowadays they mix products together because you do get larger markets with having a mix than just being a pure RPG and they tend to be more engaging than the traditional RPG.

Best example around is Final Fantasy franchise as evidence that the traditional RPG is dying off because they are losing fans and sales and having to completely change the franchise to survive to the change in what people want from RPG's (they are adding a dialogue system now for instance) and slowly moving towards a Dragon Age style of gameplay. rather than the pokemon style of gameplay

[Naamah_bb]

I'm really sick and tired of people who claim that only good RPG is a sandbox/open world RPG. Man, those games for me don't have any emotional value. You play a character that is not defined. I don't care if I have diplomacy if I cannot relate to the character I am playing.