394 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

AgitatedLemon wrote...
Regardless, they are both still RPG's. The people saying that they aren't are simply stuck using the older definition, which applied to the RPG's of the 90's-early 00's, and PnP RPG's.

I wouldn't even put PnP in there. Most PnP system got away from D&D/CRPG's inventory-focused gameplay years ago. When someone says that ME2 isn't an RPG because it doesn't have inventory, you know that the only PnP he ever played is D&D.

[nitefyre410]

Abraham_uk wrote...





There is no debate that Chicken is Chicken, regardless of what style it has been cooked.

The same argument doesn't apply to role playing games. First of all, there is a lack of consensus of what constitutes an RPG.

Now my definition of an RPG is so loose that I even include games such as Grand Theft Auto, Infameous and Final Fantasy XIII into my definition. So Mass Effect in my eyes easily passes as Role Playing Game.

However, someone may argue that the only true Role Playing Game is the old pen and paper dungeons and dragons.

Who am I to argue, when no one can agree on a definition? I've seen loads of threads like this. The only conclusion I can think of is as follows:

Why are we debating over the definition of a term?
Seriously why? Why does it matter if Mass Effect isn't an RPG?

Elements such as story, gameplay, combat, characters, lore, visuals etc are far more important than whether or not a game fits a genre.

 

Lack of  concensus amongst who -  the forum goers then you are right but as what defines a gerne  thats   group of people if far broader than  those of us come in to  the echo chamber  that is the BSN is...  


To you bolded... your absolutely ****ing right... why does it matter in the  end.

Modifié par nitefyre410, 03 janvier 2012 - 07:06 .

[joe4201]

Wait, how is DA2 not an RPG?

[AlanC9]

AlexXIV wrote...
Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

So now the position is that Bioware never made RPGs?

[AgitatedLemon]

AlexXIV wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

If you want to use such a broad label it doesn't mean much. Because people can't imagine what it means if someone says it's an RPG. If they said action RPG or turn based RPG, or RPG-Sim (as in opposite to for example flight sim) or tactical RPG or economy RPG. See what I did? You can role play in almost any genre if you have enough RPG elements in it. You probably don't know it or have heard of it but there used to be games who merged RPG and tactic. A bit like mount and blade or Spellforce. Just older, and ... better.

Thats right though - there are lots of sub-genres within the RPG genre. Both Human Revolution and Skyrim are undeniably RPGs, and yet they couldn't really be more different in their execution.

Regardless, they are both still RPG's. The people saying that they aren't are simply stuck using the older definition, which applied to the RPG's of the 90's-early 00's, and PnP RPG's.

I hate sounding like a dick, but it's true.

An RPG is an RPG is an RPG is an RPG.

Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

Let me direct you to this little tidbit...

http://www.1up.com/f...ttle-rpg-titans

Using your logic, If I were to play FA3, and never levelled up my skills or did any quests, and just went on a killing rampage, then I'm playing an FPS and not an RPG. Thanks.

Modifié par AgitatedLemon, 03 janvier 2012 - 07:08 .

[AlexXIV]

AlanC9 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

So now the position is that Bioware never made RPGs?

They made action RPGs. Always. Well Baldur's game was more turn based. But still mostly about killing stuff lacking an alternative. So yes.

[Candidate 88766]

AlexXIV wrote...
Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

Bethesda games are focused on player freedom.

Bioware games are focused on story.

Neither is the better approach - its all personal preference.

[AgitatedLemon]

AlexXIV wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

So now the position is that Bioware never made RPGs?

They made action RPGs. Always. Well Baldur's game was more turn based. But still mostly about killing stuff lacking an alternative. So yes.

In World of Warcraft you can't progress without killing things, does that make it a hack n' Slash?

How about DotA? you can't progress in that without killing things either.

[Candidate 88766]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

http://www.1up.com/f...ttle-rpg-titans

That was a rather interesting read.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

The player does not get to choose what Shepard says or how he says it.

Did you actually say this?

I don't know how to reply, apart from saying that you're dumb.

The player does not know what Shepard will say or how he will say it until after he speaks.  This is undeniably true.

[AgitatedLemon]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

http://www.1up.com/f...ttle-rpg-titans

That was a rather interesting read.

TL;DR version for those who don't bother reading.

Both make RPG's, neither is inherently better than the other. Now shut your damn traps and play the game.

[AlexXIV]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

So now the position is that Bioware never made RPGs?

They made action RPGs. Always. Well Baldur's game was more turn based. But still mostly about killing stuff lacking an alternative. So yes.

In World of Warcraft you can't progress without killing things, does that make it a hack n' Slash?

How about DotA? you can't progress in that without killing things either.

Is Diablo an RPG to you? Is Force Unleashed?

[AgitatedLemon]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

The player does not get to choose what Shepard says or how he says it.

Did you actually say this?

I don't know how to reply, apart from saying that you're dumb.

The player does not know what Shepard will say or how he will say it until after he speaks.  This is undeniably true.

Haven't you seen the dialogue wheel?

[Candidate 88766]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

The player does not get to choose what Shepard says or how he says it.

Did you actually say this?

I don't know how to reply, apart from saying that you're dumb.

The player does not know what Shepard will say or how he will say it until after he speaks.  This is undeniably true.

You know roughly what he is going to say, or at the very least the tone of it.

However, not knowing what he will say doesn't mean you don't have a choice - saying you have no choice over the dialogue is wrong, plain and simple. 

[AgitatedLemon]

AlexXIV wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

So now the position is that Bioware never made RPGs?

They made action RPGs. Always. Well Baldur's game was more turn based. But still mostly about killing stuff lacking an alternative. So yes.

In World of Warcraft you can't progress without killing things, does that make it a hack n' Slash?

How about DotA? you can't progress in that without killing things either.

Is Diablo an RPG to you? Is Force Unleashed?

Yes, Diablo is an RPG to me.

I haven't played the Force Unleashed, I don't care much for Star Wars.

[1136342t54_]

AlexXIV wrote...

Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

Well technically what you described is a rather Splinter cell or Metal Gear solid esque game. I'm not saying Bethesda games aren't RPGs its just your reason for it being one isn't really the main reason just part of it. The main thing Bethesda usually is subpar in (something Bioware and Obsidian shines in) is characters, interactions, plots and sometimes stories. The Roleplay aspect of your character is usually not that apparent in Elder Scrolls games (other than Morrowind) Fallout 3 was better than the more recent Elderscrolls games when it came to actually roleplaying your character and different ways quests can be solved.

Usually in Skyrim most quests are either do them or not do them. Many quests make me wish they took some pointers from Fallout 3 or even Fallout New Vegas. Hell the companions in New Vegas had more depth than most Skyrim and Oblivion characters. Even more than Fallout 3. Bethesda games are RPGs but for a number of a reasons but the reasons you described is basically a cool way to get past fights.

[tetrisblock4x1]

AlanC9 wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Obsidian turned Revan into a strategic mastermind who prepared the galaxy for the incoming Sith invasion by encouraging the galaxy to increase military production. The invasion the whole galasxy didn't even know was coming. Obsidians version of Revan played the whole galaxy like a conductor plays a symphony. Biowares version was the jedi councils ****.

Malak? He was a dumb **** who wanted to ruin everything for teh lulz just like most of Biowares arch villains.

Obsidian did it better.

Which is just great for Revan the NPC. Revan the PC ends up accomplishing nothing whatsoever.

I'm gonna go ahead and list myself under the category of gamers who loved both installments.

Hell, you can put me in that category too. I just really hated the start of KotOR2 once I realized what Obsidian had done. I liked KotOR 2 just fine overall -- probably because I don't like SW metaphysics any more than Chris Avellone does.

Paradoxically, I've been kind of hoping that ME2 is going to turn out to be one big Xanatos Gambit. It's OK when a villain does it to you

To be honest the writing style of Obsidian is less suitable than Bioware exactly because of the metaphysics and the force and all of that. As much as I liked KotOR 2 and preferred it's ambiguity and the fact that it wasn't a dumbed down good vs evil thing (because everyone knows that the force is like the star wars universes answer to religion, and good vs evil is about as religious as you can get). I really did like The Sith Lords a lot, but you know how starwars is. Just needed a couple of hours to readjust my expecations.

[AlexXIV]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

So now the position is that Bioware never made RPGs?

They made action RPGs. Always. Well Baldur's game was more turn based. But still mostly about killing stuff lacking an alternative. So yes.

In World of Warcraft you can't progress without killing things, does that make it a hack n' Slash?

How about DotA? you can't progress in that without killing things either.

Is Diablo an RPG to you? Is Force Unleashed?

Yes, Diablo is an RPG to me.

I haven't played the Force Unleashed, I don't care much for Star Wars.

And what are the big choices you make in Diablo? Your class, equipment and which enemy you kill first.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 03 janvier 2012 - 07:14 .

[AlanC9]

AlexXIV wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

So now the position is that Bioware never made RPGs?

They made action RPGs. Always. Well Baldur's game was more turn based. But still mostly about killing stuff lacking an alternative. So yes.

OK. But as you're perfectly well aware, not everyone defines "full RPG" the way you do. For me, the important thing about an RPG is choices and consequences. On this criterion, the TES games fail very badly -- choices without consequences arne't choices at all.

Though "fail" implies that someone's trying to do something, and Bethesda isn't trying in the first place.

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 janvier 2012 - 07:15 .

[In Exile]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Only if you think it's the developer's job to define the PC for you.

Certainly if you're looking for the game to tell you an interesting story, KotOR2 did a better job.  But that's not the core feature I want from a roleplaying game.

I fully agree with you. And you know that I find defined and narrow PC's more appropriate for an RPG, but that just has to do with which features I think enhance RP.

But KoTOR 2 did something very different. They hid your character from you, and based the entire game off on the player not having vital information that the character did. Bioware's never made a game like that.

[AgitatedLemon]

AlexXIV wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

So now the position is that Bioware never made RPGs?

They made action RPGs. Always. Well Baldur's game was more turn based. But still mostly about killing stuff lacking an alternative. So yes.

In World of Warcraft you can't progress without killing things, does that make it a hack n' Slash?

How about DotA? you can't progress in that without killing things either.

Is Diablo an RPG to you? Is Force Unleashed?

Yes, Diablo is an RPG to me.

I haven't played the Force Unleashed, I don't care much for Star Wars.

And what are the big choices you make in Diablo? Your class, equipment and which enemy you kill first.

You don't need to have massive, world changing decisions to have an RPG.

Look at WoW.

Like I said before, it's an RPG, whether it's PnP, stat-based (Which Diablo is), or action oriented (Like ME is)

[AlexXIV]

AlanC9 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Tbh Bethesda games are full RPGs to me even if people claim that Fallout is a shooter. But frankly I can get through the game without firing one gun. By being sneaky, picklocking, hacking, etc. These alternative options to get through the game are not in Bioware games. Which means they force you into combat. Which means they are heavy in the action as only way to get through. Which makes them action games with alot of RPG elements.

So now the position is that Bioware never made RPGs?

They made action RPGs. Always. Well Baldur's game was more turn based. But still mostly about killing stuff lacking an alternative. So yes.

OK. But as you're perfectly well aware, not everyone defines "full RPG" the way you do. For me, the important thing about an RPG is choices and consequences. On this criterion, the TES games fail very badly -- choices without consequences arne't choices at all.

Though "fail" implies that someone's trying to do something, and Bethesda isn't trying in the first place.

For me the core of RPG is to build and define your own character/protagonist. I mean you can make choices in many games. Choose your side, your team, etc. I want to shape the world through my protagonist. And first of all I want to shape my protagonist.

[1136342t54_]

In Exile wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
Only if you think it's the developer's job to define the PC for you.

Certainly if you're looking for the game to tell you an interesting story, KotOR2 did a better job.  But that's not the core feature I want from a roleplaying game.

I fully agree with you. And you know that I find defined and narrow PC's more appropriate for an RPG, but that just has to do with which features I think enhance RP.

But KoTOR 2 did something very different. They hid your character from you, and based the entire game off on the player not having vital information that the character did. Bioware's never made a game like that.

Not really a fault though. Bioware likes their own story structure (they even blatantly told us this) Obsidian just does different stories and even build on previous ones very well. 

[AlexXIV]

Obsidian seems to mostly continue other franchises. Which makes them pretty diverse. They could continue a Bioware franchise as well as a Bethesda franchise. But they don't really have an own niche.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

The player does not get to choose what Shepard says or how he says it.

Did you actually say this?

I don't know how to reply, apart from saying that you're dumb.

The player does not know  exactly what Shepard will say or how he will say it until after he speaks.  This is undeniably true.

Clarification inserted.

A player who understands the way ME handles dialogue will know which of the available options is the best for his character. That's all the knowledge I require, since in the end I only have whatever speech options the devs wrote for me, whether in KotOR or ME. YMMV.