778 réponses à ce sujet

[Cimeas]

Just follow TW2 as Bobsmith said.

[Sylvius the Mad]

BobSmith101 wrote...

For people who never played the head game, they never existed at all. In that respect cinematic presentation is an advance.

And for people who always played the head game, cinematic presentation is a regression.

What I don't understand is why people who weren't playing the head game were ever playing roleplaying games.

[Pygmali0n]

Bob, calm down dear, it's nice and sunny outside. DA2 went a bit jRPG, it wasn't full-on, but it was enough to help derail it. Of course it isn't a full attempt to go Japanese. I understand you think jRPG is the way to go, understand that plenty of others don't. We'll agree to disagree on that one.

There's plenty to agree on between us when I've been able to clarify where you're coming from and what you really mean, but I'm finding some of your posts missing or obscuring the point.

Also you don't need to keep posting big walls of quotes when the thread is not busy - it does kind of block-up things with a petty spat.

As much as I liked the Witcher Cimeas, I can play the Witcher to experience the Witcher. And I'd rather play a good BW game.

EDIT: Exactly Sylvius, and like you said earlier, you don't need to know the term 'emergent narrative' to play that way, I never did and I've never been able to find a welcoming group to play PNP.

Modifié par Pygmali0n, 23 juillet 2012 - 04:43 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

wsandista wrote...

DAO succeed because it tried to be an old-school RPG and did that well.

I don't agree.  DAO was a modern-hybrid.  There were extensive cinematics that removed player control.  The Warden exhibited emotions and took some actions without player input.  It beat the player over the head with the plot.  It included optional features to appeal to less experienced gamers (like plot helpers) and hid most of its mechanics from view.

DAO was the compromise.

[Pygmali0n]

Yes Sylvius, like I've said elsewhere, DA:O was a Hollywood blockbuster version of a RPG, it didn't need to be dumbed down anymore, and it proved a popular enough approach for almost any publisher.

Modifié par Pygmali0n, 23 juillet 2012 - 04:46 .

[AkiKishi]

Pygmali0n wrote...

Bob, calm down dear, it's nice and sunny outside. DA2 went a bit jRPG, it wasn't full-on, but it was enough to help derail it. Of course it isn't a full attempt to go Japanese. I understand you think jRPG is the way to go, understand that plenty of others don't. We'll agree to disagree on that one.

There's plenty to agree on between us when I've been able to clarify where you're coming from and what you really mean, but I'm finding some of your posts missing or obscuring the point.

Also you don't need to keep posting big walls of quotes when the thread is not busy - it does kind of block-up things with a petty spat.

As much as I liked the Witcher Cimeas, I can play the Witcher to experience the Witcher. And I'd rather play a good BW game.

EDIT: Exactly Sylvius, and like you said earlier, you don't need to know the term 'emergent narrative' to play that way, I never did and I've never been able to find a welcoming group to play PNP.

You want to explain how you came to the conclusion that I think JRPGs are the way to go when in the post I explicitly state that the Witcher2 is the way to go?

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

For people who never played the head game, they never existed at all. In that respect cinematic presentation is an advance.

And for people who always played the head game, cinematic presentation is a regression.

What I don't understand is why people who weren't playing the head game were ever playing roleplaying games.

Never said otherwise. But then it just becomes a matter of preference rather than a right or a wrong way to do things.

Whether you are "in character" or just picking option 3 because you like the sound of option three. The result is the same.
A friend of mine plays RPGs because he likes combat and character crafting. Plenty of games offer combat, but only RPGs mix the two. When he plays FF he skips all the cutscenes. He won't play DA/DA2/ME etc. because that is not an option and he'd have to sit through the "talkie" bits.

[Pygmali0n]

It was the probably the emotional response Bob and being hit over the head with the same posts again and again, perhaps assuming that you think jRPGs and Witcher 2 share more similarities between them than traditional wRPGs, but I apologise, I think that's enough of this digression.

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

For people who never played the head game, they never existed at all. In that respect cinematic presentation is an advance.

And for people who always played the head game, cinematic presentation is a regression.

What I don't understand is why people who weren't playing the head game were ever playing roleplaying games.

Never said otherwise. But then it just becomes a matter of preference rather than a right or a wrong way to do things.

Whether you are "in character" or just picking option 3 because you like the sound of option three. The result is the same.
A friend of mine plays RPGs because he likes combat and character crafting. Plenty of games offer combat, but only RPGs mix the two. When he plays FF he skips all the cutscenes. He won't play DA/DA2/ME etc. because that is not an option and he'd have to sit through the "talkie" bits.

If I had to blame anything it would be MMO's. They have even dropped the RPG prefix now.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 23 juillet 2012 - 05:09 .

[Cimeas]

It obviously wasn't a compromise because most modern games have voice acting. Therefore surely DA2 is the compromise (in terms of cinematics, the game leaves much to be desired as we all agree).

It still allows you to choose dialogue options, but gives the main character voice.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Cimeas wrote...

It still allows you to choose dialogue options

No it does not.  At no point in DA2 were you able to choose what it was you wanted Hawke to say.

Guessing is not the same as choosing.

[zyntifox]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

It still allows you to choose dialogue options

No it does not.  At no point in DA2 were you able to choose what it was you wanted Hawke to say.

Guessing is not the same as choosing.

And there is my main beef with DA2. I don't realy like the voiced protagonist of DA2 but that is a pain i can bear (especially since i can turn on subtitles and reduce the dialoge volume slider to zero). The paraphrase system however is gamebreaking for me. Don't get me wrong i love Mass Effect, it's one of the best game series i've played, but it works well in that game since i don't play it as or consider it a RPG. Now, Dragon age i do play as a RPG and not knowing what the character im roleplaying as is going to say is gamebreaking.

[bEVEsthda]

wsandista wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

DA2 is NOT a JRPG it's not even close. Calling DA2 a JRPG is an insult to JRPGs. That's the problem with DA2 it has no idea what it wants to be. It's a mish mash of things all pulling in different directions.

DA2 and the Witcher2 are presented in the same manner, yet no one called Witcher2 a JRPG. The Witcher2 is the model I want them to follow.

I think that the reason most people call DA2 a jRPG is because of the artstyle, which is over-exaggerated like an anime.

DA2 wasn't a jRPG because it wasn't made in Japan. While jRPGs typically feature a set PC, it isn't exactly a rule or what makes a jRPG a jRPG.

My view is that jRPG and wRPG are two distinctly different game genres (or used to be, but any amount of crossbreeding occurs mainly "by mistake", because they both share the same RGB-label).

Thus it doesn't matter if all the protagonist party are androgynous kids with cute fluffy hairdos in light pastel colors. Neither does the frequence of head bands, feathers, horns, jaggy edge weapons matter, as repulsive as all these things are. Nor does it matter where a game is developed or by who. The difference is in the gameplay between two different genres.

watch these videos.
http://penny-arcade....ese-rpgs-part-1
http://penny-arcade....ese-rpgs-part-2
http://penny-arcade....ese-rpgs-part-3

I concur with the conclusions in these videos.
Thus, Bob is wrong: DA2 is a crossbreed, but mostly a JRPG.
And The Witcher 2 is also a crossbreed, but maybe leaning slightly more western than DA2.

I want bioware to make a full "western" WRPG.
And I do not want Bioware to follow TW2. 

At least not with a fixed character combined with their own dialogue wheel. I don't think that sounds good at all.

I also don't think the twitch combat is a good idea. The many thousands of hours I've spent on console fighting games and PC FPS means that the action combat in TW2 or TES doesn't bother me, as much as it bothers St Mad. But it's irrelevant and stupid. And I'd rather have a strategic/tactical puzzle to work out in my own time. Much better gameplay value than bad action, and more appropriate for the genre.

What I'd like Bioware to look at in TW2 is the serious atmosphere. No more childish "kewl" and "fun" for kids please.

Modifié par bEVEsthda, 23 juillet 2012 - 09:34 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

I think the reason people call DA2 a JRPG (and the reason I think it's very much like a JRPG) is because JRPGs typically don't allow the player to influence the portrayal of his character. JRPG characters often speak without prompting, or have only one dialogue option (so the player's input is limited to pressing "Continue").

JRPGs define the PC for me. Western RPGs let me do that. That's the relevant difference, and that's why I don't like JRPGs.

[bEVEsthda]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I think the reason people call DA2 a JRPG (and the reason I think it's very much like a JRPG) is because JRPGs typically don't allow the player to influence the portrayal of his character. JRPG characters often speak without prompting, or have only one dialogue option (so the player's input is limited to pressing "Continue").

JRPGs define the PC for me. Western RPGs let me do that. That's the relevant difference, and that's why I don't like JRPGs.

Yes. And that, is the short version of those penny-arcade videos.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I think you ended the discussion with those video links. They're terrific.

I do not play BioWare games to be told a story. I do not play any game to be told a story. This is why I don't play JRPGs.

[AkiKishi]

bEVEsthda wrote...

wsandista wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

DA2 is NOT a JRPG it's not even close. Calling DA2 a JRPG is an insult to JRPGs. That's the problem with DA2 it has no idea what it wants to be. It's a mish mash of things all pulling in different directions.

DA2 and the Witcher2 are presented in the same manner, yet no one called Witcher2 a JRPG. The Witcher2 is the model I want them to follow.

I think that the reason most people call DA2 a jRPG is because of the artstyle, which is over-exaggerated like an anime.

DA2 wasn't a jRPG because it wasn't made in Japan. While jRPGs typically feature a set PC, it isn't exactly a rule or what makes a jRPG a jRPG.

My view is that jRPG and wRPG are two distinctly different game genres (or used to be, but any amount of crossbreeding occurs mainly "by mistake", because they both share the same RGB-label).

Thus it doesn't matter if all the protagonist party are androgynous kids with cute fluffy hairdos in light pastel colors. Neither does the frequence of head bands, feathers, horns, jaggy edge weapons matter, as repulsive as all these things are. Nor does it matter where a game is developed or by who. The difference is in the gameplay between two different genres.

watch these videos.
http://penny-arcade....ese-rpgs-part-1
http://penny-arcade....ese-rpgs-part-2
http://penny-arcade....ese-rpgs-part-3

I concur with the conclusions in these videos.
Thus, Bob is wrong: DA2 is a crossbreed, but mostly a JRPG.
And The Witcher 2 is also a crossbreed, but maybe leaning slightly more western than DA2.

I want bioware to make a full "western" WRPG.
And I do not want Bioware to follow TW2. 

At least not with a fixed character combined with their own dialogue wheel. I don't think that sounds good at all.

I also don't think the twitch combat is a good idea. The many thousands of hours I've spent on console fighting games and PC FPS means that the action combat in TW2 or TES doesn't bother me, as much as it bothers St Mad. But it's irrelevant and stupid. And I'd rather have a strategic/tactical puzzle to work out in my own time. Much better gameplay value than bad action, and more appropriate for the genre.

What I'd like Bioware to look at in TW2 is the serious atmosphere. No more childish "kewl" and "fun" for kids please.

Someone using penny arcade as a "source" seen it all now.

[AkiKishi]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I think the reason people call DA2 a JRPG (and the reason I think it's very much like a JRPG) is because JRPGs typically don't allow the player to influence the portrayal of his character. JRPG characters often speak without prompting, or have only one dialogue option (so the player's input is limited to pressing "Continue").

JRPGs define the PC for me. Western RPGs let me do that. That's the relevant difference, and that's why I don't like JRPGs.

I think you are just seeing what you want to see.

[Xewaka]

BobSmith101 wrote...
Someone using penny arcade as a "source" seen it all now.

Actually, it's not penny arcade. It's Extra Credits. They're hosted by Penny Arcade now, but they work independently from them. You would do yourself a favor checking out that series. The chapters are usually adequately researched and raise interesting points without being overpreaching.

[AkiKishi]

Xewaka wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Someone using penny arcade as a "source" seen it all now.

Actually, it's not penny arcade. It's Extra Credits. They're hosted by Penny Arcade now, but they work independently from them. You would do yourself a favor checking out that series. The chapters are usually adequately researched and raise interesting points without being overpreaching.

Initially I was going to pick it appart in detail. Then I though why bother. Maybe if it's a slow day at work.

[bEVEsthda]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Someone using penny arcade as a "source" seen it all now.

Actually, it's not penny arcade. It's Extra Credits. They're hosted by Penny Arcade now, but they work independently from them. You would do yourself a favor checking out that series. The chapters are usually adequately researched and raise interesting points without being overpreaching.

Initially I was going to pick it appart in detail. Then I though why bother. Maybe if it's a slow day at work.

There are several things about your late comments on this, which makes me think you haven't fully understood everything about this.

You can't "pick apart" the reasoning and case offered by those extra credit videos. They make a very good case of putting down the finger on an essential difference, which is of fundamental importance for people playing WRPGs. The fundamental difference, in fact.

You can't "pick apart", because the case is not about proving anything. To approach this from that angle, suggests you think you already know what a WRPG and JRPG is. And you may certainly have some opinion about that, and have a case to present on your own. But will 'your' definition have any meaning for St Mad and me?

Definitions should have relevance. It's, for instance, completely irrelevant if a game is made in Japan by a japanese developer. Why would that matter for anyone? By extra credits definition, that game can just as well be a WRPG.

[AkiKishi]

bEVEsthda wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Someone using penny arcade as a "source" seen it all now.

Actually, it's not penny arcade. It's Extra Credits. They're hosted by Penny Arcade now, but they work independently from them. You would do yourself a favor checking out that series. The chapters are usually adequately researched and raise interesting points without being overpreaching.

Initially I was going to pick it appart in detail. Then I though why bother. Maybe if it's a slow day at work.

There are several things about your late comments on this, which makes me think you haven't fully understood everything about this.

You can't "pick apart" the reasoning and case offered by those extra credit videos. They make a very good case of putting down the finger on an essential difference, which is of fundamental importance for people playing WRPGs. The fundamental difference, in fact.

You can't "pick apart", because the case is not about proving anything. To approach this from that angle, suggests you think you already know what a WRPG and JRPG is. And you may certainly have some opinion about that, and have a case to present on your own. But will 'your' definition have any meaning for St Mad and me?

Definitions should have relevance. It's, for instance, completely irrelevant if a game is made in Japan by a japanese developer. Why would that matter for anyone? By extra credits definition, that game can just as well be a WRPG.

Late comments ? I don't live here you know.

Heres a question for you. How many JRPGs have you played?

[bEVEsthda]

BobSmith101 wrote...
Heres a question for you. How many JRPGs have you played?

Wouldn't that totally depend on what is meant by a "JRPG" ?

Please explain, what a JRPG is to you, and what separates it from a WRPG.

[AkiKishi]

bEVEsthda wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Heres a question for you. How many JRPGs have you played?

Wouldn't that totally depend on what is meant by a "JRPG" ?

Please explain, what a JRPG is to you, and what separates it from a WRPG.

The question was put to you so why would my definition matter? Just list the things you have played to completion.

[bEVEsthda]

BobSmith101 wrote...

bEVEsthda wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...
Heres a question for you. How many JRPGs have you played?

Wouldn't that totally depend on what is meant by a "JRPG" ?

Please explain, what a JRPG is to you, and what separates it from a WRPG.

The question was put to you so why would my definition matter?

To avoid circular reasoning.