308 réponses à ce sujet

[LinksOcarina]

JaegerBane wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Simply put: RPG or not, or shooter or not, style wise ME3 is barely a Mass Effect game, IMO.

Sure, I mean, it only has the same characters, the same control, the continuation of the story, the same theme, the same voice actors, the same kit, the same interface....

I can at least understand your argument about whether ME3 can be considered an RPG - I don't agree with it, but I can see the coherent structure of where you're coming from. But actually trying to claim it isn't even a Mass Effect game is complete nonsense. Its a bit like saying Revenge of the Sith isn't Star Wars. The fact you dislike it doesn't somehow alter reality.

Same control, no. They refined it over three games, but they had to change the control scheme and game mechanics to do that.

Same interface is also incorrect as well. Otherwise, you are sort of right in the end.

[JaegerBane]

LinksOcarina wrote...
Same control, no.

Same interface is also incorrect as well.

By 'control' I was referring to the control scheme - i.e. it stayed as a TPS-esque scheme and didn't go from being a DA2 click-a-thon to a Quake blast-a-thon.

By Interface, I was referring to the combination of real-time movement and shooting with a command menu.

Both of these were constant throughout the series (albeit getting refined with each iteration). This isn't a matter of opinion, they're demonstrable facts.

The point is that Terror_K is claiming there was some big change that made the game virtually unrecognisable as part of the same series, and I was pointing out that there is no basis for such a stance beyond his dislike of the overall direction development took. That's fine for his reasons to fold his arms and stamp his feet, but it doesn't work as reasoning to claim that its 'barely a ME game'.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 29 juillet 2012 - 09:42 .

[Grub Killer8016]

Here's my rundown:

ME1: 95% RPG
ME2: 50% RPG, 50% Shooter
ME3: 20% RPG, 80% Shooter

Thank EA for the shooting elements killing the RPG elements.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

It isn't a traditional RPG, but I think it's an RPG nonetheless.

It has a leveling system, dialogue, choices to make, and so on. It's not turn-based, but neither is Witcher 2 or Deus Ex:HR.

The Mass Effect games (yes, even the first one) were always more of a shooting gallery than I wanted them to be. But you just have to accept it for what it is: a shooter/RPG.

That said, ME3 did go a little too far in the shooter direction for my tastes. I didn't like all the N7 'defend' missions. Made me feel like I was playing DA2 at times. Speaking of that, what is it with BioWare's sudden obsession with wave-based combat lately? It just seems lazy to me.

[LinksOcarina]

JaegerBane wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...
Same control, no.

Same interface is also incorrect as well.

By 'control' I was referring to the control scheme - i.e. it stayed as a TPS-esque scheme and didn't go from being a DA2 click-a-thon to a Quake blast-a-thon.

By Interface, I was referring to the combination of real-time movement and shooting with a command menu.

Both of these were constant throughout the series (albeit getting refined with each iteration). This isn't a matter of opinion, they're demonstrable facts.

The point is that Terror_K is claiming there was some big change that made the game virtually unrecognisable as part of the same series, and I was pointing out that there is no basis for such a stance beyond his dislike of the overall direction development took. That's fine for his reasons to fold his arms and stamp his feet, but it doesn't work as reasoning to claim that its 'barely a ME game'.

Actually, the point of control is contestable, because button implementation and power/weapon usage via cooldown reduction, ammo power usage, and so forth changed HEAVILY over the 3 games. We also had the adding and subtracting of controls for evasion, cover, weapon exchanging, and even weapon usage per class/character.

It is somewhat consistant in terms of being a full on TPS style of gameplay mechanics, but the control scheme for Mass Effect 1 will never work in Mass Effect 3, and vice versa. 

[Terror_K]

JaegerBane wrote...

The point is that Terror_K is claiming there was some big change that made the game virtually unrecognisable as part of the same series, and I was pointing out that there is no basis for such a stance beyond his dislike of the overall direction development took. That's fine for his reasons to fold his arms and stamp his feet, but it doesn't work as reasoning to claim that its 'barely a ME game'.

My main issue is that the game was supposed to be about choices and consequences via controlling and defining your Shepard, and with ME3 that's pretty much gone. Nothing I did before matters, and I never got to really control and define my Shepard any more given the lack of choices and mass amounts of autodialogue. The only thing that seems to matter is raising an arbitrary number rather than the actual consequences of my actions. Heck... none of my Shepards's faces are even the same thanks to BioWare's incompetence and laziness with implementing the import feature: one of the biggest selling points of the series when the Mass Effect trilogy was originally announced. So not only are my Shepards not the same characters as before because I no longer have control over their actions, but they don't even look the same.

Had ME3 done away with the dialogue wheel completely and just given us cutscenes, like it was always played with "No Decisions" turned on, would you still consider it a Mass Effect game I wonder? Because while we have the dialogue wheel still, it may as well not be there given the amount of choice we get with it and the amount of time its avoided entirely.

Also, regarding some of your other points, Mordin and Wreav don't have the same voice actors, and several character don't even look the same, including Anderson who looks like his face has been severely beaten, Udina and Bailey who look 20 years younger suddenly, Kirrahe who isn't even the right colour and Matriarch Aethyta and Oriana whose faces are completely different (like they didn't import properly either). ME3 came damn close to getting the silly DA2 visual reboot nonsense.

Modifié par Terror_K, 30 juillet 2012 - 04:51 .

[D4rth Man7iz]

This thread should be called "What Defines an RPG?"

Do you think Demon's Souls and Dark Souls classify as RPGs or not?

[Haargel]

I can Hackett wrote...

  I dont think im alone here but im in the middle of a Red Dead Redemption playthrough and im juist realizing thtat ME3 isnt even an RPG I mean not even close, IDK what it is maybe a hybrid between a 3rd ps and a rpg but nothing like me1, omg its just hitting me ...... what have they done?!!

They said the same about ME2, I bet they posted the same when ME1 was out, I was so smart not to get involved on forums back then, so I wouldn´t really know.

It´s also a cycle that repeats itself every 2 or 3 years

[Terror_K]

Haargel wrote...

They said the same about ME2, I bet they posted the same when ME1 was out, I was so smart not to get involved on forums back then, so I wouldn´t really know.

It´s also a cycle that repeats itself every 2 or 3 years

It's no less true for ME2 though, even now. In fact, in some ways ME2 was worse than ME3, and it was definitely where the game turned away from its roots far too much. ME2 doesn't suddenly get absolved, forgiven and forgotten for its shortcomings just because ME3 made a hash of things too. The main difference is ME2 sacrificed too many statistical and gameplay RPG factors, and while ME3 strengthened some of these again (such as weapon-modding, progressive XP, etc.) it instead sacrificed the narrative/story-driven RPG factors.

Both games suffered from the dumbing down of RPG factors for the sake of broadening appeal, but both did it in different areas and different ways. And while I deem the statistical elements of an RPG more important regarding the strength and definition of an RPG, I deem the narrative and story-driven factors to be far more enjoyable. That's mostly why I personally think ME3 is the worse game of the two, even if it did bring back several things I was calling for that ME2 lacked or messed up.

In either case, it seems BioWare are just not capable of delivering the goods like they once could. And it seems like they don't even want to. The massive fubar of the character import system alone with ME3 should be proof enough without even getting into the other dozens of issues and bad design decisions. ME2 was a trip and stumble, DA2 was BioWare falling flat on their faces, and ME3 was them deciding to drag themselves through the mud, rough stones and broken glass rather than try and pick themselves up. And even after that they seem to want to just keep dragging away.

[spirosz]

D4rth Man7iz wrote...

This thread should be called "What Defines an RPG?"

Do you think Demon's Souls and Dark Souls classify as RPGs or not?

No, but they're still amazing games. 

[JaegerBane]

LinksOcarina wrote...
Actually, the point of control is contestable, because button implementation and power/weapon usage via cooldown reduction, ammo power usage, and so forth changed HEAVILY over the 3 games. We also had the adding and subtracting of controls for evasion, cover, weapon exchanging, and even weapon usage per class/character.

It is somewhat consistant in terms of being a full on TPS style of gameplay mechanics, but the control scheme for Mass Effect 1 will never work in Mass Effect 3, and vice versa. 

As I said, you're going a significant step beyond what I was talking about. All three games handle like TPSs. There is a different emphasis in each but as I tried to point out before, but while there are minor differences, you can't honestly say that any of the games handled like an entirely different genre. They were all real-time, with a command menu that paused the action. The games didn't shift control scheme. Its not as if one handled like Dragon Age, one handled like KOTOR and another handled like Diablo. 

I see what you're getting at with the shifting emphasis of powers and the dynamic they played, but realistically this isn't equivalent to saying it handled nothing like any other game in the series. The points you mention about weapon usage, cover, evasion were hardly *totally* different on a per game basis - compare how the weapons were grouped and used across the games to how weapons are grouped and used in, say, Deus Ex:HR or F.E.A.R and perhaps you'll see what I'm getting at. 

They've changed a bit, but it doesn't match Terror_K's rhetoric that they're barely recognisable.

[JaegerBane]

Terror_K wrote...
Also, regarding some of your other points, Mordin and Wreav don't have the same voice actors, and several character don't even look the same, including Anderson who looks like his face has been severely beaten, Udina and Bailey who look 20 years younger suddenly, Kirrahe who isn't even the right colour and Matriarch Aethyta and Oriana whose faces are completely different (like they didn't import properly either). ME3 came damn close to getting the silly DA2 visual reboot nonsense.

Somewhat. I wouldn't necessarily say that an apparent difference in age is equivalent to the Star Trek-esque species changes that occurred in Dragon Age 2, but yes, there was some discrepency between how characters looked.

That being said, any rational person would be able to tell they're the same game series even if the faces of a few characters are a little off. It sounds like you're *looking* for differences rather than reacting to them - if you're going to try and list all the stuff that didn't look how they should vs the stuff that did, the list is going to be massively skewed in the latter's favour, so I'm not sure where you're going with that one.

I'm not trying to claim ME3 is perfect - just that saying it's barely related to the others of the series is pure hyperbole.

[NightAntilli]

How people consider ME2 to be 'more RPG' than ME3 is beyond me. ME2 had no weapon mods, less weapon leveling, smaller skill trees...

[WhiteKnyght]

I can Hackett wrote...

  I dont think im alone here but im in the middle of a Red Dead Redemption playthrough and im juist realizing thtat ME3 isnt even an RPG I mean not even close, IDK what it is maybe a hybrid between a 3rd ps and a rpg but nothing like me1, omg its just hitting me ...... what have they done?!!

If you want to be technical, the Mass Effect series in its entirety is more of a Space Opera with some shooter and RPG elements.

[JaegerBane]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

I can Hackett wrote...

  I dont think im alone here but im in the middle of a Red Dead Redemption playthrough and im juist realizing thtat ME3 isnt even an RPG I mean not even close, IDK what it is maybe a hybrid between a 3rd ps and a rpg but nothing like me1, omg its just hitting me ...... what have they done?!!

If you want to be technical, the Mass Effect series in its entirety is more of a Space Opera with some shooter and RPG elements.

Concise, but somewhat true - if I actually have to explain ME to someone who has no prior knowledge of it then I often struggle to properly define what genre it resides in. Ironically the closest I've gotten is to describe it as a mix of KOTOR and Star Wars: Republic Commando.

[zeypher]

Atleast star wars republic commando had good squad Ai

[BaladasDemnevanni]

JaegerBane wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

I can Hackett wrote...

  I dont think im alone here but im in the middle of a Red Dead Redemption playthrough and im juist realizing thtat ME3 isnt even an RPG I mean not even close, IDK what it is maybe a hybrid between a 3rd ps and a rpg but nothing like me1, omg its just hitting me ...... what have they done?!!

If you want to be technical, the Mass Effect series in its entirety is more of a Space Opera with some shooter and RPG elements.

Concise, but somewhat true - if I actually have to explain ME to someone who has no prior knowledge of it then I often struggle to properly define what genre it resides in. Ironically the closest I've gotten is to describe it as a mix of KOTOR and Star Wars: Republic Commando.

Actually, that's a really good comparison.

[D4rth Man7iz]

OK it's Hybrid just let's get over it.

[BloodyTalon]

D4rth Man7iz wrote...

OK it's Hybrid just let's get over it.

When nerd gets started its hard to stop just enjoy.

[JROW317]

Mass effect 3 is an RPG deal with it

[Darth Death]

JROW317 wrote...

Mass effect 3 is an RPG deal with it

In your opinion, you mean. I personally don't consider ME3 an rpg at all. 

[spirosz]

Question... to all the ones who keep insisting ME1 is 95% RPG or whatever. Were those RPG elements really that great in the first place? Dat amazing inventory system, dat spam immunity, dat lift everyone for minutes, dat shooting forever no overheating weapons.

[I can Hackett]

NightAntilli wrote...

How people consider ME2 to be 'more RPG' than ME3 is beyond me. ME2 had no weapon mods, less weapon leveling, smaller skill trees...

To me tho skill trees and wepon modding isnt all that makes an rpg what mostly made me mad was the fact that ME3 was too linear, everytime you play you leave earth, go to mars, go to tuchanka, save the citadel, recruit the quarians, go to thessia, kill cerberus go to earth in that order all the time, in me1 you could change what you do every time plus me1 felt like a HUGE universe you could freely explore in a vehicle

[PaulSX]

NightAntilli wrote...

How people consider ME2 to be 'more RPG' than ME3 is beyond me. ME2 had no weapon mods, less weapon leveling, smaller skill trees...

This is actually very interesting. Mass Effect 2 has least RPG feeling but it's considered as the best game among the three. I think ME2 did it right and did it briliantly but pity BioWare insisted on bringing ME1's feeling back and the result is a mess.

edit: spelling

Modifié par suntzuxi, 31 juillet 2012 - 02:45 .

[Sanunes]

No game meets my requirement for a RPG... they don't ask for what I rolled with my D20.