1113 réponses à ce sujet

[Jog0907]

Mclouvins wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...


Is Skyrim that much more successful than Oblivion?

Not really, especially when you take into account the amount of marketing they did, and if we've learned one thing from MW3 it's that you can sell a $60 map pack if you market the ****** out of it.

yep to me the biggest difference between skyrim and oblivion, is that the first had a massive marketing campaign when compared to the latter. The game is nice but theres nothing new about it and it doesnt deserve to be considered an actual milestone in rpg design.

[Walker White]

Speaking of mechanics, one of the things that amazes me about Bethesda games is how they cling to mechanics that we learned were broken and misguided over a decade ago. Like giving all XP to the person making the kill (Fallout 3), penalizing support players. Or positive feedback loops (Skyrim), where skill progression rewards narrow playstyles. Though to be fair, BioWare was guilty of the latter in ME2 with its morality system.

Also, if you are going to make a game that emphasizes weight limits so much (like Skyrim), you need to put better thought into how to design your loot. You know what the best loot in Skyrim is? Food. In the beginning, weapons and armor are at best 3 gp/pound, while most food is 10 to 20 gp/pound.

[Giantdeathrobot]

A new year is indeed upon us, as I agree with Gatt9 for once. Making up stories in your head does not an RPG make. Even ye olde tabletops had fairly strick rules as to what the player an or can't do; in the end, it's the GM that enforced them. Bethesda is like a GM that creates an absolutely huge campaign, but doesn't intervene afterwards. Players can do whatever they like, he won't stop them. While this might be all well and good at first, it soon becomes a real mess, and the lack of reactivity of the whole thing makes it boring after a while. That's Skyrim in a nutshell; I explored dungeons, admired the breathtaking vistas, and completed the main quest and each major faction, in about 70 hours, finishing at level 46. Motivation to replay? 0. Rien. Nada. I have already seen everything interesting. The rest is completely generic Radiant quests, generic companions, utterly boring NPCs across the board (Cicero is the only single one that was memorable, and that's because he was crazy, I mean christ Diablo II had more in depth character developpement than this supposed RPG), unreactive world, and more generic stuff. The fact that I could also do everything in one playthrough also invalidates the RPG claim; the whole point of role-playing is having to choose what you do based on your abilities. If I can do everything, what use do I have for differing abilities at all? In the end, the only difference is that I kill people with swords, blasts of magic or arrows. I won't make a new character just for that.

Also, me being in the minority: Do you really think Skyrim's sales are that far ahead of ME2's? Do you really believe that you're any less of a minority? As said, these kinds of PC and home console centric games are a fraction of the market. Whatever your opinion of the Wii and iPhone markets are, they are much bigger than anything ''harcore gamers'' usually play. And if you mean critically, ME2 outmuscles Skyrim as shown. Get off your high horse

[Thargorichiban]

The only thing that I would hope Skyrim could have influenced on ME3 (a bit late now) would be unique layouts for every location in the game.

Dragon Age 2 was horrifying in this regard when you went to the same location dozens of times and yet you were supposedly in a new location. It really served to drag the gamer out of the scene.

So yeah, just crossing my fingers that there aren't any copy/paste areas in ME3.

[Mclouvins]

Thargorichiban wrote...

The only thing that I would hope Skyrim could have influenced on ME3 (a bit late now) would be unique layouts for every location in the game.

Dragon Age 2 was horrifying in this regard when you went to the same location dozens of times and yet you were supposedly in a new location. It really served to drag the gamer out of the scene.

So yeah, just crossing my fingers that there aren't any copy/paste areas in ME3.

They fixed that in the ME1 - ME2 transition.

[Ecto-Plasmic Effect]

As a better game.

[Biotic Sage]

^ I will say that the "I don't drink milk, I drink chocolate milk!" rebuttal gave me a good laugh.

[ArkkAngel007]

Biotic Sage wrote...

^ I will say that the "I don't drink milk, I drink chocolate milk!" rebuttal gave me a good laugh.

Agreed, but then was confused with the age 26.  I thought it was already established that it was 13.  Or was it 12?  I can't follow all the plot changes...

[Biotic Sage]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

^ I will say that the "I don't drink milk, I drink chocolate milk!" rebuttal gave me a good laugh.

Agreed, but then was confused with the age 26.  I thought it was already established that it was 13.  Or was it 12?  I can't follow all the plot changes...

It's a twist!

[DRUNK_CANADIAN]

Few will likely compete with Skyrim directly, but with RPGs they don't really have too, plus if they keep the formula more or less the same, Bioware will do fine with ME3.

[ArkkAngel007]

Biotic Sage wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

^ I will say that the "I don't drink milk, I drink chocolate milk!" rebuttal gave me a good laugh.

Agreed, but then was confused with the age 26.  I thought it was already established that it was 13.  Or was it 12?  I can't follow all the plot changes...

It's a twist!

Already a better love story than Twilight.

[Biotic Sage]

^ True enough, my friend.

[TheLastThought]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...
I explored dungeons, admired the breathtaking vistas, and completed the main quest and each major faction, in about 70 hours, finishing at level 46. Motivation to replay? 0. Rien. Nada. I have already seen everything interesting. The rest is completely generic Radiant quests, generic companions, utterly boring NPCs across the board (Cicero is the only single one that was memorable, and that's because he was crazy, I mean christ Diablo II had more in depth character developpement than this supposed RPG), unreactive world, and more generic stuff. The fact that I could also do everything in one playthrough also invalidates the RPG claim; the whole point of role-playing is having to choose what you do based on your abilities. If I can do everything, what use do I have for differing abilities at all? In the end, the only difference is that I kill people with swords, blasts of magic or arrows. I won't make a new character just for that.

Exactly my thoughts! I loved playing Skyrim but past the 100 hours all you have left are meanigless radiant quest and dungeons and dungeons and dungeons... And you'll never start all over again. But btw Skyrim is all about exploration and I loved it for that, not Its NPCs( aside from Cicero )At the end that's the biggest difference between TES and ME: the first is all about its world while the second is about the complexity and interactions of people( and cinema.. Soo many cinematographic sequences in ME:O) Probably the challenge in the future of RPGs is making a game that offers both things... Want to see that!!

Modifié par TheLastThought, 03 janvier 2012 - 04:50 .

[DRUNK_CANADIAN]

TheLastThought wrote...

Giantdeathrobot wrote...
I explored dungeons, admired the breathtaking vistas, and completed the main quest and each major faction, in about 70 hours, finishing at level 46. Motivation to replay? 0. Rien. Nada. I have already seen everything interesting. The rest is completely generic Radiant quests, generic companions, utterly boring NPCs across the board (Cicero is the only single one that was memorable, and that's because he was crazy, I mean christ Diablo II had more in depth character developpement than this supposed RPG), unreactive world, and more generic stuff. The fact that I could also do everything in one playthrough also invalidates the RPG claim; the whole point of role-playing is having to choose what you do based on your abilities. If I can do everything, what use do I have for differing abilities at all? In the end, the only difference is that I kill people with swords, blasts of magic or arrows. I won't make a new character just for that.

Exactly my thoughts! I loved playing Skyrim but past the 100 hours all you have left are meanigless radiant quest and dungeons and dungeons and dungeons... And you'll never start all over again. But btw Skyrim is all about exploration and I loved it for that, not Its NPCs( aside from Cicero )At the end that's the biggest difference between TES and ME: the first is all about its world while the second is about the complexity and interactions of people( and cinema.. Soo many cinematographic sequences in ME:O) Probably the challenge in the future of RPGs is making a game that offers both things... Want to see that!!

Would never happen, as it is, both of these games have insanely large budgets...specifically Skyrim, very expensive game to produce.

[Graunt]

Skyrim is easily the most overrated game since Oblivion.  Neither game was very good because they failed so much in so many areas.  Skyrim was probably the second best TES game, but the combat is still horribly 1994 and they ruined magic similar to how Bioware ruined biotics in ME2.

[AlanC9]

Wasn't combat magic kinda sucky in Morrowind too? Beating things to death with a stick was much more effective. Or better yet, stabbing things to death with a spear, since that ended up getting you more hit points.

I just assumed it was a TES tradition.

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 janvier 2012 - 06:22 .

[Blacklash93]

Skyrim is a great game filled to the brim with quality content and possibilities, but there's nothing new or innovative about it. It's no RPG milestone by any means.

[GnusmasTHX]

It will be viewed as having:

An actual story.
Characters.
Less ****ing bugs.

I thoroughly enjoy Skyrim, and its potential for more far exceeds all Mass Effect combined because Bethesda actually realized people would probably want to mod their game... But the initial release was unforgivably terrible. Nor am I going to lie and say that Skyrim is a game about story and characters... It's there (in a strange way, too. There are quests 5 minutes long more compelling than the Main Quest, and the Thieves Guild is actually well done compared to the College [which was blatant DLC prequel] and the Companions were just non existent) but it's obviously not the focus of the game. Bethesda just gives you an open world and puts stuff in it you can do, and when you exhaust all these things you're done, until you turn to mods.

That, and spawn 50 NPC's to kill each other.

[KreeCapt]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Skyrim is a great game filled to the brim with quality content and possibilities, but there's nothing new or innovative about it. It's no RPG milestone by any means.

This.

I would add that Mass Effect was more innovative with the Dialogue Wheel which everyone uses now.

[Onyx Jaguar]

argonian persona wrote...

Is BioWare releasing a toolkit for ME3?

98% chance of no toolkit.  In fact I haven't seen hardly any game (recall none so far could be wrong) that license Unreal Engine 3 uh, hold on that sentence sounds weird.

The only toolkit that I've seen for Unreal Engine 3 games was for Unreal Tournament 3, which was made by Epic.  

Think of Mass Effect as more or less a Gears of War mod, scratch that, a Roboblitz mod as I believe that came out first.  

Not many mods of Gunman Chronicles out there 

Also to address the OP: Neon

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 03 janvier 2012 - 08:51 .

[argonian persona]

Walker White wrote...

Speaking of mechanics, one of the things that amazes me about Bethesda games is how they cling to mechanics that we learned were broken and misguided over a decade ago. Like giving all XP to the person making the kill (Fallout 3), penalizing support players. Or positive feedback loops (Skyrim), where skill progression rewards narrow playstyles. Though to be fair, BioWare was guilty of the latter in ME2 with its morality system.

Also, if you are going to make a game that emphasizes weight limits so much (like Skyrim), you need to put better thought into how to design your loot. You know what the best loot in Skyrim is? Food. In the beginning, weapons and armor are at best 3 gp/pound, while most food is 10 to 20 gp/pound.

Interesting post, but I disagree. The underlying rpg mechanics have gotten honed, and I like how focusing gets rewarded. There is complete freedom, but focusing should be encouraged. It's not like a jack-of-all-trades has a disadvantage.

Past games like Oblivion had some levelling issues, but Bethesda isn't afraid to hold you accountable to how you create and make your character.

Also, i think TES's loot system is fantastic. I'm not sure if you played TES though, because by far and for a while the best weight/value ratio is by far potions. Easily and by a lot. Someone shouldn't be able to store every piece of loot you get in one all encompassing inventory. It's easy to get an inventory loadout by neatly storing loot in a house.