290 réponses à ce sujet

[Vapaa]

Ryanianmc wrote...

From all the news me3 is more "action" oriented. Well that's all well and good but this is supposed to be a rpg game. I'm worried folks, very worried.

Huh ? all I remember from ME1 is: RATATATATATATATATATATATA, DUDUDUDUDUDU....RATATATATATATATATATATA......DUDUDUDUDU....

[Ryanianmc]

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

From all the news me3 is more "action" oriented. Well that's all well and good but this is supposed to be a rpg game. I'm worried folks, very worried.

What does RPG mean to you? Cumbersome inventory screens and unforgiving talent systems, or story and character development? I think fast-paced action serves story and character development better than pausing the game for ten minutes to figure out which item to drop because it'll sell for less back in town.

Man thats quite a generic statement.  I will try and sum up a brief idea what I feel rpg means to me.
"A feeling of belonging to ones environment to intelligent and non-intelligent lifeforms around the user"

As to pause the game for 10 minutes, yah you know where Im going with this.. 10 min? really?

Modifié par Ryanianmc, 28 février 2012 - 08:49 .

[Arrtis]

Dry County wrote...

Arrtis wrote...
You do not NEED to kill almost every single one to advance.
You know there was just more to the game.

I'm not sure running past enemies for no advantage and the obvious disadvantage of no experience suggests more.

You do not understand freedom much do you?
And what it entails in good games do you?
It means they add more things to do.
Its the difference between DAO and DA2.
There is less to do.Less variation.Less freedom.Less replayability.
Replayed ME1 much more often than ME2.
Replayed DAO much more often than DA2.
They give better gameplay at the expense of mostly everything.

[AlanC9]

Refara wrote...

ME1 had a much, much, much, MUCH better story with great pacing.

Pacing was OK as long as you blew off all of the UNC missions.

Modifié par AlanC9, 28 février 2012 - 08:58 .

[Epic777]

gabe2gg wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

Personally I dislike inventories in party based player RPGs I think they work better in single player RPGs.

huh?

Logically RPG inventories should force the players into careful descions about the items they store due to limited inventory space. In practice the player by the mid-game has plenty of space. The hardest choice the player has is between +1 infinity blade and +1.5 infinity blade. Most of the items in a players inventory tend to be vendor trash only useful to be sold. This happens more in party based RPGs than single player RPGs. Think of the inventories of Deus Ex versus Baldurs gate.)

[AlanC9]

Ryanianmc wrote...

As crazy as it sounds that cumbersome inventory grows on you after a time.  So much so you cant belive any other mass effect game axed it.  Perhpas its my hardcore min/max gamer mentality speaking to me.. iono but its there.. and I miss it.

ME1's inventory didn't grow on me. I hated it a little more every time I played ME1.

Modifié par AlanC9, 28 février 2012 - 08:58 .

[Dark Specie]

Gee, here we go again... Both games had their pros and cons IMO, both had stuff that made'em shine in different ways. Such as:

ME1:

More customable gear. More stuff at stores too (I agree that it was too much stuff available in the end, but that's preferrable to too little stuff as in ME2)
Fun Mako-exploration (hey, it's way more fun than ME2-Planet Scanning)
Better story
More soild squadmates (hey, more companions in ME2 is fun, but you've got to admit that most of'em weren't very soild nor memorable)

ME2:

Paragon/Renegade interrupts (Best thing about ME2 IMO)
Limited ammo/clips
A lot more variety in enemies you face
A unique quest for each companion (Granted, ME1 had those too, except for Liara, Ashley and Kaidan, but the Tali sidequest shrinks a bit since it's not unique to her, it's part of another quest, and if I recall correctly, you could break into Tonn Actus's hideout without Wrex ever telling you about it, so)

[shadowkiller74]

ME2 had a story? And here I thought I spent most of the game having to do things that had absolutely nothing to do with the main quest. Don't want your characters to die? Better buy some probes, fuel and play that terrible mining mini game (which is just as bad as the exploration in ME1), as well as do all the loyalty quests. Don't do them and everybody dies and you have a less then 20 hour game. It doesn't progress the story, but hey it wastes your time while padding the playtime so why don't you swing over to this planet so you can help a squad mate out who has daddy issues. Otherwise they'll give up and die in the final mission. ME2 didn't get as good as ME1 until you started the suicide mission, until then you were just aimlessly wandering the galaxy looking for minerals, squad mates, and trying to make everybody happy.

Also, Shepard dying at the beginning of ME2 is probably one of the dumbest story ideas ever. Oh no, Shepard dies and then pulls a Jesus, or sorry a Lazarus, with the help of Cerberus. What creativity. Guess they had to figure some way of putting you under the thumb of Cerberus after a bunch of side quests in the original game that had you killing them.

ME2 did have a better combat system, you really can't argue against that. Though as a shooter all the Mass Effect games are pretty mediocre when you compare ME's clunky mechanics to other shooters. Everything that made Mass Effect an RPG, which was lite to begin with, is almost completely stripped out of ME2 and 3 (from the demo). ME destroys ME2 on the RPG level. You actually have options, unlike the mostly superficial ones in ME2, you actually have real upgrades throughout the game and items you knew you eventually wanted to get like the Spectre weapons and Colossus armor. You can actually customize your squad and have it actually means something. ME1 had better skill trees, better loot system (though the inventory was horrid, it at least it had an inventory), customizing your weapons and armor was better, it had better quests that are tied to the actual story, and actual coherent story telling.

God forbid Bioware actually make another RPG. It seems they think to make an RPG anymore is has to have a conversation tree and basic stats, if that is all it takes they should be looking to Deus Ex for inspiration then. Don't get me wrong, I liked ME2, but it wasn't an RPG.

Modifié par shadowkiller74, 28 février 2012 - 09:20 .

[p.W]

Ryanianmc wrote...

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

From all the news me3 is more "action" oriented. Well that's all well and good but this is supposed to be a rpg game. I'm worried folks, very worried.

What does RPG mean to you? Cumbersome inventory screens and unforgiving talent systems, or story and character development? I think fast-paced action serves story and character development better than pausing the game for ten minutes to figure out which item to drop because it'll sell for less back in town.

Man thats quite a generic statement.  I will try and sum up a brief idea what I feel rpg means to me.
"A feeling of belonging to ones environment to intelligent and non-intelligent lifeforms around the user"

As to pause the game for 10 minutes, yah you know where Im going with this.. 10 min? really?

If I'm in the middle of a dramatic confrontation, I don't want to be pausing the game at all. Thirty seconds might as well be ten minutes. You know what I hate more than anything in ME2? When I'm doing some mission, I pull up my power wheel to use an ability, and I realize that my squaddie or some other NPC has just started saying something. Now they're paused mid-word until I resume the game. Oops.

The game mechanics have forcibly intruded on my immersion. The urgency of whatever threat was being made, whatever warning was being issued, has been completely destroyed. That is the extent to which I think pausing ruins the dramatic experience.

So sitting around a corpse deciding what loot to take with me... no, thanks. I'd rather be racing to the next confrontation, the next plot point.

[AlanC9]

Epic777 wrote...
Logically RPG inventories should force the players into careful descions about the items they store due to limited inventory space. In practice the player by the mid-game has plenty of space. The hardest choice the player has is between +1 infinity blade and +1.5 infinity blade. Most of the items in a players inventory tend to be vendor trash only useful to be sold. This happens more in party based RPGs than single player RPGs. Think of the inventories of Deus Ex versus Baldurs gate.)

It's understandable that it's worse in party-based games. You've got to be able to equip a lot of characters, and every time you get a better item something on someone becomes vendor trash. Not to mention that if there are several reasonable choices at any particular power level -- and if there aren't choices then inventory is really worthless -- you've got all those extra items kicking around too.

[Ryanianmc]

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

From all the news me3 is more "action" oriented. Well that's all well and good but this is supposed to be a rpg game. I'm worried folks, very worried.

What does RPG mean to you? Cumbersome inventory screens and unforgiving talent systems, or story and character development? I think fast-paced action serves story and character development better than pausing the game for ten minutes to figure out which item to drop because it'll sell for less back in town.

Man thats quite a generic statement.  I will try and sum up a brief idea what I feel rpg means to me.
"A feeling of belonging to ones environment to intelligent and non-intelligent lifeforms around the user"

As to pause the game for 10 minutes, yah you know where Im going with this.. 10 min? really?

If I'm in the middle of a dramatic confrontation, I don't want to be pausing the game at all. Thirty seconds might as well be ten minutes. You know what I hate more than anything in ME2? When I'm doing some mission, I pull up my power wheel to use an ability, and I realize that my squaddie or some other NPC has just started saying something. Now they're paused mid-word until I resume the game. Oops.

The game mechanics have forcibly intruded on my immersion. The urgency of whatever threat was being made, whatever warning was being issued, has been completely destroyed. That is the extent to which I think pausing ruins the dramatic experience.

So sitting around a corpse deciding what loot to take with me... no, thanks. I'd rather be racing to the next confrontation, the next plot point.

With enough experience you don't have to pause ME1 or ME2 at all.  It just comes with time.  I have obscene hours played in both games.

Modifié par Ryanianmc, 28 février 2012 - 09:06 .

[AlanC9]

shadowkiller74 wrote...

ME2 had a story? And here I thought I spent most of the game having to do things that had absolutely nothing to do with the main quest.

ME2 had a story in the same way a season of an episodic TV drama like, say, Buffy the Vampire Slayer has a story. Some episodes are about that season's Big Bad, some are about his minions, some are about the Scoobies, some are just the Slayer doing Slayer things.

I like that approach fine. Worked in BG2, works now.

[Epic777]

AlanC9 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...
Logically RPG inventories should force the players into careful descions about the items they store due to limited inventory space. In practice the player by the mid-game has plenty of space. The hardest choice the player has is between +1 infinity blade and +1.5 infinity blade. Most of the items in a players inventory tend to be vendor trash only useful to be sold. This happens more in party based RPGs than single player RPGs. Think of the inventories of Deus Ex versus Baldurs gate.)

It's understandable that it's worse in party-based games. You've got to be able to equip a lot of characters, and every time you get a better item something on someone becomes vendor trash. Not to mention that if there are several reasonable choices at any particular power level -- and if there aren't choices then inventory is really worthless -- you've got all those extra items kicking around too.

My point is most inventories party based inventories are usless fot that reason. Usually there is no argument for the best items, think the spectre weapons for me1 or deadric/glass items in the elder scrolls. The player equips the best combination of items for their playstyle. The actual inventory (unequiped items) are usually only going to be sold with no second thought. 

Modifié par Epic777, 28 février 2012 - 09:15 .

[gabe2gg]

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

From all the news me3 is more "action" oriented. Well that's all well and good but this is supposed to be a rpg game. I'm worried folks, very worried.

What does RPG mean to you? Cumbersome inventory screens and unforgiving talent systems, or story and character development? I think fast-paced action serves story and character development better than pausing the game for ten minutes to figure out which item to drop because it'll sell for less back in town.

ME2 was a RPG?

[p.W]

Ryanianmc wrote...

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

From all the news me3 is more "action" oriented. Well that's all well and good but this is supposed to be a rpg game. I'm worried folks, very worried.

What does RPG mean to you? Cumbersome inventory screens and unforgiving talent systems, or story and character development? I think fast-paced action serves story and character development better than pausing the game for ten minutes to figure out which item to drop because it'll sell for less back in town.

Man thats quite a generic statement.  I will try and sum up a brief idea what I feel rpg means to me.
"A feeling of belonging to ones environment to intelligent and non-intelligent lifeforms around the user"

As to pause the game for 10 minutes, yah you know where Im going with this.. 10 min? really?

If I'm in the middle of a dramatic confrontation, I don't want to be pausing the game at all. Thirty seconds might as well be ten minutes. You know what I hate more than anything in ME2? When I'm doing some mission, I pull up my power wheel to use an ability, and I realize that my squaddie or some other NPC has just started saying something. Now they're paused mid-word until I resume the game. Oops.

The game mechanics have forcibly intruded on my immersion. The urgency of whatever threat was being made, whatever warning was being issued, has been completely destroyed. That is the extent to which I think pausing ruins the dramatic experience.

So sitting around a corpse deciding what loot to take with me... no, thanks. I'd rather be racing to the next confrontation, the next plot point.

With enough experience you don't have to pause ME1 or ME2 at all.  It just comes with time.  I have obscene hours played in both games.

Considering the most dramatic playthrough is the first one and the least experienced playthrough is the first one, I think we have a slight problem. By the time Joe Casual Gamer Shmoe is experienced enough to be able to magically bypass the inventory tweaking that RPG diehards hold so dear (wasn't not being able to bypass it the point?), the game's drama and urgency has already worn off.

[shadowkiller74]

Catsith wrote...

Well, I will always remember and favor this part of ME1, for sure. I agree with you, and I wanted them to fix and improve it, and I was hopeful after seeing how well they had done the planet exploration in Overlord that we would see more of that in ME3. But let's not pretend that the exploration in ME1 was anything more than a shallow attempt, and that the content on these planets was anything more than light.

I am sorry, but Overlord was garbage. Give me back the buggy and get rid of that hovercraft. Or at the very least let me get out of it whenever I want to.

[Vapaa]

gabe2gg wrote...

ME2 was a RPG?

As much as ME1

[AlanC9]

Epic777 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
It's understandable that it's worse in party-based games. You've got to be able to equip a lot of characters, and every time you get a better item something on someone becomes vendor trash. Not to mention that if there are several reasonable choices at any particular power level -- and if there aren't choices then inventory is really worthless -- you've got all those extra items kicking around too.

My point is most inventories party based inventories are usless fot that reason. Usully there is no argument for the best items, think the spectre weapons for me1

Well, that's a little unfair to the genre. ME1 had one of the worst item progressions ever. Almost bad enough to be a TES game.

And the question isn't so much about the best items as what happens through the midgame. By the time you've got the best items the game's almost over anyway.

Having said that, I mostly agree with you. In the end the obvious loadout is obvious.

Modifié par AlanC9, 28 février 2012 - 09:14 .

[p.W]

gabe2gg wrote...

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

From all the news me3 is more "action" oriented. Well that's all well and good but this is supposed to be a rpg game. I'm worried folks, very worried.

What does RPG mean to you? Cumbersome inventory screens and unforgiving talent systems, or story and character development? I think fast-paced action serves story and character development better than pausing the game for ten minutes to figure out which item to drop because it'll sell for less back in town.

ME2 was a RPG?

I don't know. What does RPG mean to you?

I explained what it means to me, so yeah. For me it was.

I bet you're one of the people who'd say that every single single player RTS mission is supposed to be about building a huge base and trampling anywhere between 1-10 enemy bases, right? Sorry, this is 2012, not 1995.

[Kai Hohiro]

Vapaä wrote...

gabe2gg wrote...

ME2 was a RPG?

As much as ME1

More than ME1. Even the ME3 mp demo already has more interesting mechanics to customize your characters than ME1 did.

ME1 was only a good "RPG" for people who get kicks out of having a Flaming Vorpal Sword +5 vs a Flaming Vorpal Sword +4.

Modifié par Kai Hohiro, 28 février 2012 - 09:17 .

[Randy1012]

I think each game did certain things better than the other. I thought ME1's story and atmosphere were vastly superior to ME2's, but I thought ME2's environments and combat were much better than ME1's. While it's true that ME2 did have better character development than ME1, I still found myself caring less about Shepard's team in ME2. Outside of Mordin, Jack, Legion, and Grunt (and not including Garrus and Tali, since they were in both games), they just weren't as interesting to me as the ME1 crew. Hardly any of them were truly important to the plot and could have been left out of the game completely, whereas everyone in ME1 had some kind of meaningful tie to the story.

The loyalty missions were touted as a huge feature in ME2, but most of the squad in ME1 (all but Ashley and Kaidan, in fact) sort of had their own loyalty missions, too. Wrex had the search for his family's ancestral armor, Garrus had his hunt for Dr. Saleon, Tali had the geth data that completed her pilgrimage, and Liara had her quest to stop/redeem her mother. Granted, ME2 did a much better job with its character-specific quests, but ME1 had a much meatier story than ME2 to make up for it.

ME1's inventory system was overly cluttered and convoluted, but I think ME2 went a little too far in simplifying things. Virtually all character and armor/weapon customization was removed, and the leveling system could barely be called such. ME3's system looks to be an excellent hybrid between its two predecessors, thankfully.

The writing in ME1 also seemed to be tighter and more cohesive. I think part of that was because of its stronger narrative versus ME2's less focused series of character vignettes. Also, in ME1, everyone had their casual outfits on the Normandy, and then wore appropriate armor when leaving the ship to go on missions, including helmets in locations without an atmosphere. In ME2, everyone wore the same outfits both on the ship and off, even if they weren't appropriate for combat or non-atmospheric conditions, and instead of helmets many of them wore breather masks (which would do them no good in a vacuum). I know these are minor issues, but the little things make a huge difference in immersion and believability.

So, I guess overall I prefer ME1, but I do prefer ME2 in some areas. My hope is that ME3 will be a perfect mix of all the good parts of both ME1 and ME2 with as little of the bad parts as possible.

[Namevah]

Arrtis wrote...
You do not understand freedom much do you?

I'm just saying that you're not necessarely getting anything more from the game when you're actually getting less (experience, in this case). It's a perfectly viable option as a player, as is allowing Shepard to die or having Shepard stand beside a wall for hours, glaring at the pixelated crack riding towards the ceiling. You're just not getting anything out of it.

shadowkiller74 wrote...
Don't get me wrong, I liked ME2, but it wasn't an RPG.

That's probably the best way of thinking of ME2, and maybe even ME1. Avoid the
restrictive thinking of what technically constitutes an RPG and they
become more enjoyable.

Modifié par Dry County, 28 février 2012 - 09:17 .

[Ryanianmc]

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

p.W wrote...

Ryanianmc wrote...

From all the news me3 is more "action" oriented. Well that's all well and good but this is supposed to be a rpg game. I'm worried folks, very worried.

What does RPG mean to you? Cumbersome inventory screens and unforgiving talent systems, or story and character development? I think fast-paced action serves story and character development better than pausing the game for ten minutes to figure out which item to drop because it'll sell for less back in town.

Man thats quite a generic statement.  I will try and sum up a brief idea what I feel rpg means to me.
"A feeling of belonging to ones environment to intelligent and non-intelligent lifeforms around the user"

As to pause the game for 10 minutes, yah you know where Im going with this.. 10 min? really?

If I'm in the middle of a dramatic confrontation, I don't want to be pausing the game at all. Thirty seconds might as well be ten minutes. You know what I hate more than anything in ME2? When I'm doing some mission, I pull up my power wheel to use an ability, and I realize that my squaddie or some other NPC has just started saying something. Now they're paused mid-word until I resume the game. Oops.

The game mechanics have forcibly intruded on my immersion. The urgency of whatever threat was being made, whatever warning was being issued, has been completely destroyed. That is the extent to which I think pausing ruins the dramatic experience.

So sitting around a corpse deciding what loot to take with me... no, thanks. I'd rather be racing to the next confrontation, the next plot point.

With enough experience you don't have to pause ME1 or ME2 at all.  It just comes with time.  I have obscene hours played in both games.

Considering the most dramatic playthrough is the first one and the least experienced playthrough is the first one, I think we have a slight problem. By the time Joe Casual Gamer Shmoe is experienced enough to be able to magically bypass the inventory tweaking that RPG diehards hold so dear (wasn't not being able to bypass it the point?), the game's drama and urgency has already worn off.

What exactly is your argument?  That because its the first game in the series one should "accept defeat" and wait till more "perfected" combat mechanics are implemented?

I feel the complete opposite.  Its the nature of the first game that makes its a "dimond in the rough" that demmands attention.  It does not conform to ME2 definition of gameplay, but thats not a bad thing at all.  Learn to adapt and learn and you will find a rewarding experience.

Modifié par Ryanianmc, 28 février 2012 - 09:19 .

[AlanC9]

Ryanianmc wrote...

What exactly is your argument?  That because its the first game in the series one should "accept defeat" and wait till more "perfected" combat mechanics are implemented?

No. People should go ahead and play it -- ME1's not bad or anything. We just shouldn't  pretend it's better than ME2 or ME3.

Modifié par AlanC9, 28 février 2012 - 09:21 .

[Texhnolyze101]

I to prefer ME1 to ME2 and ME3 i replay ME1 more than i do ME2 also.