301 réponses à ce sujet

[nitefyre410]

A lot of RPG players don't realize is that the features that are said to be the main stays of the genre are really not main stay features. They were the results of the early days of gaming where the put these things in to extend game play time and get more life out of the game.

[Lakan Suko]

Ziggeh wrote...

imnar wrote...

i personally feel if bioware wouldn't have removed but instead streamlined the inventory me2 would have been perfect.

That's exactly what they did.

No actually it was practically trashed, they said it themselves, it was officially removed, not streamlined. I believe imnar was implying in the sense of actually improving the inventory.

[Ziggeh]

furryrage59 wrote...

Who said it requires a huge amount of intelligence?

The thread title?

[Ziggeh]

Lakan Suko wrote...
No actually it was practically trashed, they said it themselves, it was officially removed, not streamlined. I believe imnar was implying in the sense of actually improving the inventory.

It did everything (non aesthetic) the previous system did, but without it becoming a time sink (well, ok, planet scanning). You don't have a literal inventory, but you achieve the same ends. I consider that streamlining.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 19 février 2012 - 03:09 .

[Lakan Suko]

furryrage59 wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

The notion that playing a RPG requires some huge amount of intelligence and thought process.. its laughable, just out right laughable.

Who said it requires a huge amount of intelligence?

If you're playing an rpg that doesn't make you think, your issues are probably deeper than the game itself tbh.

It is indeed laughable because I agree, since when did it require any huge amount of intelligence? It's a game.

[mjharper]

Beefcake9000 wrote...

I know I can just ignore it, hit RPG Mode and forget about it, and given the feedback on that forum survey where something like 90% of all users played RPG mode, I guess most people will. I just think it's insulting that someone in EA or Bioware or whoever, really had such a low opinion of their player base that this crap was implemented. I worry that it sets a dangerous precedent for future Bioware titles, where freedom of choice is increasingly restricted in order not to alienate the 'COD Crowd'. But that's crap! Even the COD Crowd can learn to pick a choice on a wheel and see what happens. They may even enjoy it! They may even be inspired to seek out other games where they can determine the course of the story!

The point is choice. You can choose to play ME3 as an RPG (the way its meant to be played) or you can play it like an action adventure. Clearly, most of us will play in RPG mode and that's fine. But let's face it, the 'COD crowd' (generalization) are never going to pick up an RPG in any case. If they dont play it, they won't discover they like it. On the other hand, if you offer them a game in which you can turn off the RPG mode, they might play it; and having played and enjoyed it, they might decide to have a go with the RPG mode turned on. And then they might enjoy it.

Basically, it's a bait and switch tactic. And so long as including optional modes doesn't significantly impact on development time, I don't see any problem, just as I don't see any problem with including a casual difficulty so long as hard is actually hard. It certainly has nothing to do with dumbing down. 

Modifié par mjharper, 19 février 2012 - 03:13 .

[furryrage59]

Ziggeh wrote...

furryrage59 wrote...

Who said it requires a huge amount of intelligence?

The thread title?

I don't see anywhere where it says a huge amount of inttelligence is required.

I suggest some glasses.

[piemanz]

furryrage59 wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

furryrage59 wrote...

Who said it requires a huge amount of intelligence?

The thread title?

I don't see anywhere where it says a huge amount of inttelligence is required.

I suggest some glasses.

"The Dumbing Down Effect "

You don't think that the title implies that ME1 requires a greater degree of intelligence than ME2 or ME3?

Modifié par piemanz, 19 février 2012 - 03:16 .

[Alex_SM]

The whole sad point is that is not Mass Effect the one being dumbed down, but the whole gaming industry.


I remember shooters being actually challenging and not completely streamlined. You see Doom and Doom 2, Quake, Duke Nukem 3D, Descent and Descent 2, Heretic, Hexen... and it's impossible for them to be in the same genre as the SP campaign of COD MW2/3 or Battlefield 3.

Even more streamlined ones (Half Life and Half Life 2) kept the sense of exploration in the levels, and everything felt natural. Never feel like "room with boxes = fight / no boxes = no fight".

I remember games being hard on hard levels, and nearly impossible on the hardest difficulty setting. You play Descent on Insane, and have to be a very good player to pass first level. Nowadays there is no point on playing normal settings, because the hardest is "normal".

It's a bit like this

And the same happens to every genre. 

Would it be so hard for a game like ME to make full scenarios instead of just a straight line into combat? Like not having all doors locked on the cerberus facility at the beginning of ME2 and being able to explore it a bit. 

Modifié par Alex_SM, 19 février 2012 - 03:19 .

[imnar]

Ziggeh wrote...

imnar wrote...

i personally feel if bioware wouldn't have removed but instead streamlined the inventory me2 would have been perfect.

That's exactly what they did.

no it isn't. they totally removed it. did you read my whole post? i'm speaking rpg type inventory. i just played me1 and me2 back to back. you cannot swap ammo type, armor or even specific (e.g. diff. types of snipers) gun type on the fly. you cannot carry multiple armors at once or outfit your companions. being able to swap out 3 guns or change armor at a load out screen is fps inventory. . i don't think the game was "dumbed down" at all, but what ever....

Modifié par imnar, 19 février 2012 - 03:19 .

[Lakan Suko]

Ziggeh wrote...

Lakan Suko wrote...
No actually it was practically trashed, they said it themselves, it was officially removed, not streamlined. I believe imnar was implying in the sense of actually improving the inventory.

It did everything (non aesthetic) the previous system did, but without it becoming a time sink (well, ok, planet scanning). You don't have a literal inventory, but you achieve the same ends. I consider that streamlining.

It's the same as accepting a poor excuse of something, it's not the same system(and very unappealing, basic, and dull, at least to me), and infact, going back to my system just to use my "inventory" took more time than just being able to open it from anywhere.

You can't just take a feature our and justify it as "saving time", that's a little extreme, that's what making improvements are for... In the same logic, we should take out dialogue choice(making it a choice however like it is now in me3 is not bad) and combat to save time.

As well, as said earlier, devs already stated that they actually removed it.

[Beefcake9000]

furryrage59 wrote...

If you're playing an rpg that doesn't make you think, *snip*

Which is my real gripe about 'Action Mode'. You no longer need to think about your choices, about the possible consequence of your choices or how those choices will influence/affect your character and the story. That, for me at least, is what's at the heart of a really good RPG. Once you strip away inventory, gear, loot and all the other stuff that have become RPG staples, choosing your own path is what an RPG is all about.

For the record, I don't think ME2 is particularly dumbed down. I'd call it a case of 'extreme streamlining'
As in, they went too far. Which is why I'm glad to see that weapon/gear upgrades seem improved and expanded in 3, as well as the skill trees. I just hope the narrative options haven't been streamlined to the extent they appeared in the demo. That would really justle my jimmies, because those choices are at the heart of what made the ME series so good.

I also hope they haven't removed the hacking/bypass mini-games entirely. They were too frequent in ME2, and became tedious as a result, but I think we need something, some hurdle we have to overcome for optional gear/upgrades from say, hacking a terminal or whatever.

So no more pointless door bypasses in the middle of an action section - streamline that, by all means! I have no issue with that!

But if you remove these mini-games entirely you remove another element of challenge - something to make the player pause, think and then be rewarded for suceeding - as opposed to just giving it to them at the click of a button. It's a fine balance, but not impossible.

[furryrage59]

piemanz wrote...

furryrage59 wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

furryrage59 wrote...

Who said it requires a huge amount of intelligence?

The thread title?

I don't see anywhere where it says a huge amount of inttelligence is required.

I suggest some glasses.

"The Dumbing Down Effect "

You don't think that the title implies that ME1 requires a greater degree of intelligence than ME2 or ME3?

Dumbing down and needing a great amount of intelligence to play is lol exaggeration at best.

[Kevin Martell]

ME2 was not "dumbed down" from ME1. Combat-wise, it actually takes a lot more thinking to do well in ME2 than it does in in ME1. The inventory and leveling up systems were streamlined, no doubt, but it's not like BioWare did that because people were not understanding them in ME1. People understood them fine in ME1, it's just that after awhile they became burdensome. Another point - Exploration. If you really call landing on planets and simply driving around to different "anomalies" exploration or if you think that's fun, then I'm sorry but you're either enjoying it on principle or your mind simply works differently than most. I recently went back an played ME1 and found myself bored most of the time at the pointless driving around all the time.

Bottom line is that the changes BioWare made between ME1 and ME2 were mostly for the better. ME1 is a good but deeply flawed game wheres ME2 is a game with some flaws that is mostly amazing. I get that not everyone is going to agree with me one that, and that's fine, but this idea that ME2 was "dumbed down" is just ridiculous. The streamlining of the inventory and leveling up systems made the game a lot more fun, in my opinion.

[nitefyre410]

furryrage59 wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

The notion that playing a RPG requires some huge amount of intelligence and thought process.. its laughable, just out right laughable.

Who said it requires a huge amount of intelligence?

If you're playing an rpg that doesn't make you think, your issues are probably deeper than the game itself tbh.

Who said that well  the title of theard...  "The Dumbing Down Effect"    Which implies that the removaly of features in  RPGS  that are  seen  by some to be to "intelligent" means the RPGS  are being dumbed down.  RPG's as a  whole don't require  alot of knowledge or work to play.   Compared to somthing like a fighting game..

Where  one has to memorize  a move list, understand how these moves work and which situations that move should be used and should not be use.  Understand which characters have  an advantage  or disadvantage against the character your playing.  Putting together how  the characters  combos and how those combos work.  Most important in a match  makeing the spit second analysis of  information the screen.  

So a game that has and releatively easy entery point because deeper and more complex as one's skill level increase.  

One could say that the  fast more action oreinted battles have increased  the amount of  thought  the player has  to put into the game  and the speed in which the player has to process this infromation.  

Modifié par nitefyre410, 19 février 2012 - 03:27 .

[Ziggeh]

imnar wrote...
i'm speaking rpg type inventory.

Right, and I think you're being too literal. In this case I don't believe the mechanism is as important as what it achieves.

imnar wrote...
i just played me1 and me2 back to back. you cannot swap ammo type, armor or even specific (e.g. diff. types of snipers) gun type on the fly.

You can swap ammo. Different types of the same weapon I will give you, but I think that makes for increased gameplay decisions rather than allowing you a one size fits all solution. Armour, granted but that's of fairly limited gameplay value, you've got
to admit. Though it was nice playing dress up.

imnar wrote...
being able to swap out 3 guns or change armor at a load out screen is fps inventory. .

Funny that. The typical FPS inventory used to be carrying 9 weapons of increasing power. I'd say that the fps inventory has become an RPG inventory, with experience based incremental progression and everything.

[Lakan Suko]

Alex_SM wrote...

The whole sad point is that is not Mass Effect the one being dumbed down, but the whole gaming industry.


I remember shooters being actually challenging and not completely streamlined. You see Doom and Doom 2, Quake, Duke Nukem 3D, Descent and Descent 2, Heretic, Hexen... and it's impossible for them to be in the same genre as the SP campaign of COD MW2/3 or Battlefield 3.

Even more streamlined ones (Half Life and Half Life 2) kept the sense of exploration in the levels, and everything felt natural. Never feel like "room with boxes = fight / no boxes = no fight".

I remember games being hard on hard levels, and nearly impossible on the hardest difficulty setting. You play Descent on Insane, and have to be a very good player to pass first level. Nowadays there is no point on playing normal settings, because the hardest is "normal".

It's a bit like this

And the same happens to every genre. 

Would it be so hard for a game like ME to make full scenarios instead of just a straight line into combat? Like not having all doors locked on the cerberus facility at the beginning of ME2 and being able to explore it a bit. 

I am with you 100% on this one... Honestly, for the average joe that says "games make you stupid", well, I am afraid that statement will be correct in a few years...

It wouldn't hurt at all, if these game devs STOPPED with the holding of the hands... Seriously, I also find it funny when games nowadays literally do have their highest difficulty as the default(Skyrim, and Skyrim doing it, out of all games, is pretty scary, and sends a bad message)....

[imnar]

nitefyre410 wrote...

A lot of RPG players don't realize is that the features that are said to be the main stays of the genre are really not main stay features. They were the results of the early days of gaming where the put these things in to extend game play time and get more life out of the game.

what's wrong with extending game play?? i play on console and pc and if a game is great i'll buy console and pc versions and i'll play them over and over. i understand inflation will always exist, but if the price goes up and technology...shouldn't the quality, detail, and depth?? with that said...i am sooooo thankful for bethesda and bioware for releasing incredible mod tools which allow pc players to extend the game play time.

[sorentoft]

Naughty Bear wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

Mass Effect 3 demo has less chocies in what you say and it has me worried.

Wut?

Was that hard for you to understand?

There. Was. Only. Two. Dialogue. Choices.

The rest was auto, i'm sure the developers said that there are more options to choose in what to say. But i am still worried.

It's a demo.<_<

[Ziggeh]

Lakan Suko wrote...
You can't just take a feature our and justify it as "saving time"

Unless pacing is important. If for example your RPG is narrative heavy.

Lakan Suko wrote...
As well, as said earlier, devs already stated that they actually removed it.

And they can be overly literal too.

[Ziggeh]

imnar wrote...
i understand inflation will always exist, but if the price goes up and technology...shouldn't the quality, detail, and depth??

Nope, because as the technology advances so does complexity, increasing development time.

[furryrage59]

nitefyre410 wrote...

furryrage59 wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

The notion that playing a RPG requires some huge amount of intelligence and thought process.. its laughable, just out right laughable.

Who said it requires a huge amount of intelligence?

If you're playing an rpg that doesn't make you think, your issues are probably deeper than the game itself tbh.

Who said that well  the title of theard...  "The Dumbing Down Effect"    Which implies that the removaly of features in  RPGS  that are  seen  by some to be to "intelligent" means the RPGS  are being dumbed down.  RPG's as a  whole don't require  alot of knowledge or work to play.   Compared to somthing like a fighting game..

Where  one has to memorize  a move list, understand how these moves work and which situations that move should be used and should not be use.  Understand which characters have  an advantage  or disadvantage against the character your playing.  Putting together how  the characters  combos and how those combos work.  Most important in a match  makeing the spit second analysis of  information the screen.  

So a game that has and releatively easy entery point because deeper and more complex as one's skill level increase.  

One could say that the  fast more action oreinted battles have increased  the amount of  thought  the player has  to put into the game  and the speed in which the player has to process this infromation.  

Normal, layman intelligence is the standard, so where did this huge amount of intelligence thing come from?

[Il Divo]

Lakan Suko wrote...

I honestly hope you were joking, remove even more of the game? So we're sacrificing the many, for the few, or rather, in your case, for the one... Removing even more features that just needs improvement is one thing, removing a part that the game is largely known for? Nah...

If it's truly a dead end, remove it, but ditching things should only be a last resort, we can't just do away with EVERYTHING...

I'm afraid I'm not joking. The problem is that you already made a value judgment. "Just needs improvement" implies that the feature was good enough on its own that people would have rather held onto it. If a feature actively detracts from your enjoyment of the game, as exploration did for myself and others, then its removal can only be seen as a benefit, since that frees up time and resources for other aspects of the game to improve on.

Ultimately, we don't know who the "many" or "the few" are for opinions on exploration. All we know is that there were complaints. The whole thing about Mass Effect being "known for" planetary explanation doesn't help us much. Mass Effect is known for alot of things (sci fi universe, interactive narrative, Reapers), so exploration cannot be narrowed as "the reason" for the game's success.

Modifié par Il Divo, 19 février 2012 - 03:36 .

[nitefyre410]

imnar wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

A lot of RPG players don't realize is that the features that are said to be the main stays of the genre are really not main stay features. They were the results of the early days of gaming where the put these things in to extend game play time and get more life out of the game.

what's wrong with extending game play?? i play on console and pc and if a game is great i'll buy console and pc versions and i'll play them over and over. i understand inflation will always exist, but if the price goes up and technology...shouldn't the quality, detail, and depth?? with that said...i am sooooo thankful for bethesda and bioware for releasing incredible mod tools which allow pc players to extend the game play time.

 

There is nothing wrong with extending game play but there is a difference between extenting gameplay and padding  gameplay through  too much repetition and needlessly tidous tasks.   Instead of   having a game that is full of content  for the player to play through.    

Ex ... Level grinding or a better  example look at the difference between Castlevania 1 and Castlevania 2.

[Naughty Bear]

sorentoft wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

Naughty Bear wrote...

Mass Effect 3 demo has less chocies in what you say and it has me worried.

Wut?

Was that hard for you to understand?

There. Was. Only. Two. Dialogue. Choices.

The rest was auto, i'm sure the developers said that there are more options to choose in what to say. But i am still worried.

It's a demo.<_<

Well done, i even said in the first post you quoted that i knew it was a demo.