3855 réponses à ce sujet

[marshalleck]

ShadyKat wrote...

Don't presume too much marshalleck. Many people are on the fence with this game.

I agree. I am, myself. But I am comfortable in my belief that many of the people making a stink about non-humans are going to change their tune once there is actual concrete information about what DA3 is offering.

[Rawgrim]

David Gaider wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...
Several people I know won`t be pre-ordering this time. the reason for this was that they would have to play as a human, yet again. Its only 4-5 people, though. But the lack of races was the reason for it.

Good thing you've no need to make that determination yet, as you can't actually pre-order the game.  Once it's announced, then you'll be able to see what we've done and where our resources have gone. If that works for you, then great. If missing the other races can't possibly be made up for by anything else, and it was the only thing that added value for you, then consider yourself duly informed. DA3 won't be for everyone, regardless of what we do.

Ohh I will wait and see. As I said in the other post (probably got posted while you were typing this one), Its about replayability. 100 dollars for 30 hours of gameplay is a tad expensive.

[David Gaider]

Rawgrim wrote...
Ohh I will wait and see. As I said in the other post (probably got posted while you were typing this one), Its about replayability. 100 dollars for 30 hours of gameplay is a tad expensive.

I'm not sure that racial options are the only other things that add replayability, but sure. I get that. We do make the game with the knowledge that the vast majority of our players only play the game once (if they finish it at all) and thus replayability isn't as high a priority as the player having agency and options within that first playthrough (as well as having a length that is appropriate for a meaty RPG) -- but it's still important. I guess we'll see how that goes once the reveal begins.

[Rawgrim]

David Gaider wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...
Ohh I will wait and see. As I said in the other post (probably got posted while you were typing this one), Its about replayability. 100 dollars for 30 hours of gameplay is a tad expensive.

I'm not sure that racial options are the only other things that add replayability, but sure. I get that. We do make the game with the knowledge that the vast majority of our players only play the game once (if they finish it at all) and thus replayability isn't as high a priority as the player having agency and options within that first playthrough (as well as having a length that is appropriate for a meaty RPG) -- but it's still important. I guess we'll see how that goes once the reveal begins.

The racial arn`t the only options. But since they were in the first game (the one that really set the standard), removing those options feels like a step backwards. I am pretty sure replayability can be added in other ways - infact I am 100 percent sure of it. Making alot of changes to the gameplay based on your class, for example. Or wich companions you use. Lots of stuff to take from those areas. Some quests being dependant on what class you are, maybe.

I guess I am a  minority then, since I tend to replay rpgs at least 3 times (If i like them of course).

[Spankoman]

I played Origins to completion 3 times, and played all but one of the 'origins' to one extent or another. But that was an exception for me; typically I don't replay a game because I don't have that kind of time, which is why I value games with a lot of one-time-through content so highly. So for me, racial options aren't really what matters most. I feel I get the most out of a longer single experience.

I did think that not allowing a choice of races in DA2 was odd, but after playing the game, I don't really see what it would have realistically added to the story, so I'm glad they didn't.

[labargegrrrl]

for me, race option isn't about replay. the game itself does that for me. if i liked it, i replay. if i don't, i don't. there are a lot more factors that will influence that for me than just my race selection.

but when i start a pc on a note of disappointment (which is what a human-only pc does for me) it's harder to enjoy or appreciate the initial experience. and i never can quite stop thinking about how it might be a different experience throughout, had i been given the option. even if i'm having a blast playing, there's just that nagging voice in the back of my head that doesn't go away.

[SpEcIaLRyAn]

David Gaider wrote...

Good thing you've no need to make that determination yet, as you can't actually pre-order the game.  Once it's announced, then you'll be able to see what we've done and where our resources have gone. If that works for you, then great. If missing the other races can't possibly be made up for by anything else, and it was the only thing that added value for you, then consider yourself duly informed. DA3 won't be for everyone, regardless of what we do.

Well than consider me one of those people on the fence about preordering the game. If once you show more of the game I like what I see than I will more than likely preorder DA3. And your right you can't please everybody. The best you can do is try your best to make the best game possible.

[DPSSOC]

I don't mind the PC being human, but I wouldn't have minded them being Elven or Dwarven, or what not. Origins was interesting in that it allowed us to come at the events of the games from different starting points but the choice of race didn't really change all that much. However it rarely does and I can remember the days when race selection was nothing more than a skin choice. Would have been nice to play as something other than human, but I can't say it's a deal breaker or even more than a minor disappointment.

[Terrorize69]

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

[Rawgrim]

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in his\\her shoes.

[LinksOcarina]

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Ironically the backgrounds mattered more than the races in that regard, considering that backgrounds tend to shape how your character can act or what they can do in typical RPG parlance, over racial traits and what not.

You notice with the Mass Effect multiplayer the emphasis is on classes over race. The races have different base stat traits but the classes have different powers and stat distribution, making them all wholly unique in most regards to how they can be built, how they can be used, and so forth. So a Volus Engineer will always have different functions over a Human one, while a Vorcha soldier may be a close-quarters fighter instead of the Turian soldier, who deals death at a distance.

That, to me, is a better role-playing experience because you have a background that determines more about your character than their race. So being a human noble vs a human fisherman might give you a different perspective, over being a human noble and an elven fisherman. The elf part is irrelevent because the fisherman aspect takes precedence. 

[Terrorize69]

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Since roleplaying is all in the mind and not whats on the screen, then it makes no difference if you got a racial choice then does it? Roleplaying can fix everything

Many many people use headcanon to further their story, so really, what is shown on screen only fills in the blanks of the players imagination and provides a very, very basic story template.

[Rawgrim]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Ironically the backgrounds mattered more than the races in that regard, considering that backgrounds tend to shape how your character can act or what they can do in typical RPG parlance, over racial traits and what not.

You notice with the Mass Effect multiplayer the emphasis is on classes over race. The races have different base stat traits but the classes have different powers and stat distribution, making them all wholly unique in most regards to how they can be built, how they can be used, and so forth. So a Volus Engineer will always have different functions over a Human one, while a Vorcha soldier may be a close-quarters fighter instead of the Turian soldier, who deals death at a distance.

That, to me, is a better role-playing experience because you have a background that determines more about your character than their race. So being a human noble vs a human fisherman might give you a different perspective, over being a human noble and an elven fisherman. The elf part is irrelevent because the fisherman aspect takes precedence. 

In Thedas, though, your race determines your background. So i am 50-50 with you on that argument. I see your point, and all that.

Well...the ME multiplayer doesn`t have anything to do with roleplaying, to be honest. You can pick "classes" while playing multiplayer on CoD too, but that doesn`t make it roleplaying. Roleplaying isn`t about functions in battle. That bit ties to the tactics bit. But yes, having different races have different variations of the classes is not a bad thing. Elven warriors don`t fight the way human warriors might do (in general). Still. All that should be up to the player to decide. Its the players character.

[Rawgrim]

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Since roleplaying is all in the mind and not whats on the screen, then it makes no difference if you got a racial choice then does it? Roleplaying can fix everything

Many many people use headcanon to further their story, so really, what is shown on screen only fills in the blanks of the players imagination and provides a very, very basic story template.

You can`t roleplay a dwarf while every character you meet in game reffers to you as Human. Plus you also look like a human... Its about playing as the race + class you picked. Getting into the mindset of the character. I kind of explained that pretty good in the first post i made about it.

[Terrorize69]

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Since roleplaying is all in the mind and not whats on the screen, then it makes no difference if you got a racial choice then does it? Roleplaying can fix everything

Many many people use headcanon to further their story, so really, what is shown on screen only fills in the blanks of the players imagination and provides a very, very basic story template.

You can`t roleplay a dwarf while every character you meet in game reffers to you as Human. Plus you also look like a human... Its about playing as the race + class you picked. Getting into the mindset of the character. I kind of explained that pretty good in the first post i made about it.

Except 99% of people refer to you as the Warden lol, then you switch to playing as the dwarf character whos name I've forgotten then your good to go, head canon fire away.

[Rawgrim]

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Since roleplaying is all in the mind and not whats on the screen, then it makes no difference if you got a racial choice then does it? Roleplaying can fix everything

Many many people use headcanon to further their story, so really, what is shown on screen only fills in the blanks of the players imagination and provides a very, very basic story template.

You can`t roleplay a dwarf while every character you meet in game reffers to you as Human. Plus you also look like a human... Its about playing as the race + class you picked. Getting into the mindset of the character. I kind of explained that pretty good in the first post i made about it.

Except 99% of people refer to you as the Warden lol, then you switch to playing as the dwarf character whos name I've forgotten then your good to go, head canon fire away.

Well yeah, they reffer to him as Warden...because thats what he is? His job etc? No rp issues at all with that. Grasping at straws much?

[LinksOcarina]

Rawgrim wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Ironically the backgrounds mattered more than the races in that regard, considering that backgrounds tend to shape how your character can act or what they can do in typical RPG parlance, over racial traits and what not.

You notice with the Mass Effect multiplayer the emphasis is on classes over race. The races have different base stat traits but the classes have different powers and stat distribution, making them all wholly unique in most regards to how they can be built, how they can be used, and so forth. So a Volus Engineer will always have different functions over a Human one, while a Vorcha soldier may be a close-quarters fighter instead of the Turian soldier, who deals death at a distance.

That, to me, is a better role-playing experience because you have a background that determines more about your character than their race. So being a human noble vs a human fisherman might give you a different perspective, over being a human noble and an elven fisherman. The elf part is irrelevent because the fisherman aspect takes precedence. 

In Thedas, though, your race determines your background. So i am 50-50 with you on that argument. I see your point, and all that.

Well...the ME multiplayer doesn`t have anything to do with roleplaying, to be honest. You can pick "classes" while playing multiplayer on CoD too, but that doesn`t make it roleplaying. Roleplaying isn`t about functions in battle. That bit ties to the tactics bit. But yes, having different races have different variations of the classes is not a bad thing. Elven warriors don`t fight the way human warriors might do (in general). Still. All that should be up to the player to decide. Its the players character.

Actually, Id argue that Mass Effect 3's multiplayer is more Role-Playing than meets the eye.

Got to remember, role-playing for some people is just about utility in combat. Tons of power gamers and min-maxers would tell you otherwise how useful combative skills are and how they look to get that extra 5% bonus damage out of their characters vs social interaction. And the CoD classes are not fluid at all, they are basicaly excuses to call something a class by giving you starting equipment. And you got to remember, the equipment is what people use in CoD, not the character. 

Mass Effect differentiates by giving you specific powers for a job/class. The N7 Paladin is the only guy with the Omni-shield, for example. The Turian Ghost has a Tech Charge with the jetpack, and the Vorcha have blood lust. That allows you to play a role. It is in combat yes, but it still functions as the same way. It makes the characters unique outside of their use of weapons and extra equipment bonuses. That is something you don't see in Call of Duty, which basically makes the classes in that game pointless because they transform into a mash of everything in the end. 

And i'm not sure race determines your standing in Thedas. The only case you have is how elves are treated, but Dwarves and even Kossith kind of get the respect they deserve in the end, so I don't know if thats a major issue outside of Elven rights. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 27 octobre 2012 - 11:06 .

[Terrorize69]

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Since roleplaying is all in the mind and not whats on the screen, then it makes no difference if you got a racial choice then does it? Roleplaying can fix everything

Many many people use headcanon to further their story, so really, what is shown on screen only fills in the blanks of the players imagination and provides a very, very basic story template.

You can`t roleplay a dwarf while every character you meet in game reffers to you as Human. Plus you also look like a human... Its about playing as the race + class you picked. Getting into the mindset of the character. I kind of explained that pretty good in the first post i made about it.

Except 99% of people refer to you as the Warden lol, then you switch to playing as the dwarf character whos name I've forgotten then your good to go, head canon fire away.

Well yeah, they reffer to him as Warden...because thats what he is? His job etc? No rp issues at all with that. Grasping at straws much?

It was aimed at your "referring to human" comment

[Rawgrim]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Ironically the backgrounds mattered more than the races in that regard, considering that backgrounds tend to shape how your character can act or what they can do in typical RPG parlance, over racial traits and what not.

You notice with the Mass Effect multiplayer the emphasis is on classes over race. The races have different base stat traits but the classes have different powers and stat distribution, making them all wholly unique in most regards to how they can be built, how they can be used, and so forth. So a Volus Engineer will always have different functions over a Human one, while a Vorcha soldier may be a close-quarters fighter instead of the Turian soldier, who deals death at a distance.

That, to me, is a better role-playing experience because you have a background that determines more about your character than their race. So being a human noble vs a human fisherman might give you a different perspective, over being a human noble and an elven fisherman. The elf part is irrelevent because the fisherman aspect takes precedence. 

In Thedas, though, your race determines your background. So i am 50-50 with you on that argument. I see your point, and all that.

Well...the ME multiplayer doesn`t have anything to do with roleplaying, to be honest. You can pick "classes" while playing multiplayer on CoD too, but that doesn`t make it roleplaying. Roleplaying isn`t about functions in battle. That bit ties to the tactics bit. But yes, having different races have different variations of the classes is not a bad thing. Elven warriors don`t fight the way human warriors might do (in general). Still. All that should be up to the player to decide. Its the players character.

Actually, Id argue that Mass Effect 3's multiplayer is more Role-Playing than meets the eye.

Got to remember, role-playing for some people is just about utility in combat. Tons of power gamers and min-maxers would tell you otherwise how useful combative skills are and how they look to get that extra 5% bonus damage out of their characters vs social interaction. And the CoD classes are not fluid at all, they are basicaly excuses to call something a class by giving you starting equipment. And you got to remember, the equipment is what people use in CoD, not the character. 

Mass Effect differentiates by giving you specific powers for a job/class. The N7 Paladin is the only guy with the Omni-shield, for example. The Turian Ghost has a Tech Charge with the jetpack, and the Vorcha have blood lust. That allows you to play a role. It is in combat yes, but it still functions as the same way. It makes the characters unique outside of their use of weapons and extra equipment bonuses. That is something you don't see in Call of Duty, which basically makes the classes in that game pointless because they transform into a mash of everything in the end. 

And i'm not sure race determines your standing in Thedas. The only case you have is how elves are treated, but Dwarves and even Kossith kind of get the respect they deserve in the end, so I don't know if thats a major issue outside of Elven rights. 

The MP is still just about doing damage to waves of enemies. No rp involved at all. No dialogue either. If this is roleplaying to you, then Super Mario, Gears of War, Halo, and Unreal Tournament are also roleplaying. The "role" in roleplaying isn`t about the role you have in combat. Its about the role you as a person has, more or less. Wich is why loads of rp fans don`t consider Diablo to be an rpg. Its an action game with a tiny bit of rpg features in it.

As for players just doing min\\maxing - they arn`t roleplaying, they are playing an rts. Simple as that.

[Rawgrim]

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Since roleplaying is all in the mind and not whats on the screen, then it makes no difference if you got a racial choice then does it? Roleplaying can fix everything

Many many people use headcanon to further their story, so really, what is shown on screen only fills in the blanks of the players imagination and provides a very, very basic story template.

You can`t roleplay a dwarf while every character you meet in game reffers to you as Human. Plus you also look like a human... Its about playing as the race + class you picked. Getting into the mindset of the character. I kind of explained that pretty good in the first post i made about it.

Except 99% of people refer to you as the Warden lol, then you switch to playing as the dwarf character whos name I've forgotten then your good to go, head canon fire away.

Well yeah, they reffer to him as Warden...because thats what he is? His job etc? No rp issues at all with that. Grasping at straws much?

It was aimed at your "referring to human" comment

Makes no sense.

[Gotholhorakh]

Rawgrim wrote...

I guess I am a  minority then, since I tend to replay rpgs at least 3 times (If i like them of course).

and even then it deserves to be said that people who play once still make and enjoy choices (even if the point was re: replayability).

Adanu wrote...

Gotholhorakh wrote...

-k-a-t-e- wrote...

If done properly, with a good range of background/origin options with enough depth, I think human restricted characters of DA3 can have as much to offer as the DAO choices did,
sure they would be different but just because it's only one race
doesn't mean they can't do lots with it. A human-only protagonist
doesn't automatically mean there's going to be a huge limit to
roleplaying etc.

If you stand on one leg all the time, one shoe is just as good as two.

[smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/angry.png[/smilie]

Your example -and point- is flawed and ignores that there are many paths to being a human, not just yours.

My "point" was an observation that we were rationalising a new limitation as if it wasn't one, to make ourselves feel better about it. Not at all flawed, as you can see from the post I quoted which does... exactly that. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/smile.png[/smilie]


The other stuff about paths to being a human... Erm.

Modifié par Gotholhorakh, 27 octobre 2012 - 11:13 .

[LinksOcarina]

Rawgrim wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Ironically the backgrounds mattered more than the races in that regard, considering that backgrounds tend to shape how your character can act or what they can do in typical RPG parlance, over racial traits and what not.

You notice with the Mass Effect multiplayer the emphasis is on classes over race. The races have different base stat traits but the classes have different powers and stat distribution, making them all wholly unique in most regards to how they can be built, how they can be used, and so forth. So a Volus Engineer will always have different functions over a Human one, while a Vorcha soldier may be a close-quarters fighter instead of the Turian soldier, who deals death at a distance.

That, to me, is a better role-playing experience because you have a background that determines more about your character than their race. So being a human noble vs a human fisherman might give you a different perspective, over being a human noble and an elven fisherman. The elf part is irrelevent because the fisherman aspect takes precedence. 

In Thedas, though, your race determines your background. So i am 50-50 with you on that argument. I see your point, and all that.

Well...the ME multiplayer doesn`t have anything to do with roleplaying, to be honest. You can pick "classes" while playing multiplayer on CoD too, but that doesn`t make it roleplaying. Roleplaying isn`t about functions in battle. That bit ties to the tactics bit. But yes, having different races have different variations of the classes is not a bad thing. Elven warriors don`t fight the way human warriors might do (in general). Still. All that should be up to the player to decide. Its the players character.

Actually, Id argue that Mass Effect 3's multiplayer is more Role-Playing than meets the eye.

Got to remember, role-playing for some people is just about utility in combat. Tons of power gamers and min-maxers would tell you otherwise how useful combative skills are and how they look to get that extra 5% bonus damage out of their characters vs social interaction. And the CoD classes are not fluid at all, they are basicaly excuses to call something a class by giving you starting equipment. And you got to remember, the equipment is what people use in CoD, not the character. 

Mass Effect differentiates by giving you specific powers for a job/class. The N7 Paladin is the only guy with the Omni-shield, for example. The Turian Ghost has a Tech Charge with the jetpack, and the Vorcha have blood lust. That allows you to play a role. It is in combat yes, but it still functions as the same way. It makes the characters unique outside of their use of weapons and extra equipment bonuses. That is something you don't see in Call of Duty, which basically makes the classes in that game pointless because they transform into a mash of everything in the end. 

And i'm not sure race determines your standing in Thedas. The only case you have is how elves are treated, but Dwarves and even Kossith kind of get the respect they deserve in the end, so I don't know if thats a major issue outside of Elven rights. 

The MP is still just about doing damage to waves of enemies. No rp involved at all. No dialogue either. If this is roleplaying to you, then Super Mario, Gears of War, Halo, and Unreal Tournament are also roleplaying. The "role" in roleplaying isn`t about the role you have in combat. Its about the role you as a person has, more or less. Wich is why loads of rp fans don`t consider Diablo to be an rpg. Its an action game with a tiny bit of rpg features in it.

As for players just doing minmaxing - they arn`t roleplaying, they are playing an rts. Simple as that.

Play some table-tops, a lot of people I used to game with would tell you otherwise, much to my chagrin since I liked talking my way out of situations or using illusion magic. 

The "role" part is so subjective there is no definition, hence why the answer to this question is both right and wrong; it is both your role in a combat situation, and the role your character has through their persona.

Those RP fans who don't consider Diablo and RPG are basically incorrect, because by that definition than most RPG's out there, including a majority of BioWare's catalgoue, are not RPG games by such a narrow margin.

And that is a poor definition of things to begin with, kind of like how the "JRPG" term tells us nothing about an RPG, except the perception of what a JRPG is. It's a terrible term that catalogues games for us, and makes no sense in the process. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 27 octobre 2012 - 11:16 .

[Terrorize69]

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Since roleplaying is all in the mind and not whats on the screen, then it makes no difference if you got a racial choice then does it? Roleplaying can fix everything

Many many people use headcanon to further their story, so really, what is shown on screen only fills in the blanks of the players imagination and provides a very, very basic story template.

You can`t roleplay a dwarf while every character you meet in game reffers to you as Human. Plus you also look like a human... Its about playing as the race + class you picked. Getting into the mindset of the character. I kind of explained that pretty good in the first post i made about it.

Except 99% of people refer to you as the Warden lol, then you switch to playing as the dwarf character whos name I've forgotten then your good to go, head canon fire away.

Well yeah, they reffer to him as Warden...because thats what he is? His job etc? No rp issues at all with that. Grasping at straws much?

It was aimed at your "referring to human" comment

Makes no sense.

You expressed that you can't roleplay as a dwarf because people will call you a human, I corrected that people call you by your title and not your race regardless, thus you can roleplay "eaiser"

[DreamwareStudio]

Novate wrote...

There is a huge problem with Dragon Age 3 having only 1 Human Protagonist, this decision destroys any moral and racial perspectives that other races provide for the game world. One of the most captivating aspects of DA:O was its political conflict and racial issues. It was down played to a certain degree in DA:O that I had hoped was disgussed more in detail in DA2. And since DA2 didn't reach my expectations, I was hoping DA3 was gonna explore it more in depth. 

Its a shame really, I played DA:O not as an adventure , Action game, I played it as an RPG, playing a role, looking at the world through my character's eyes, understanding that no one is created equal in this dark world, where there are wrongs that I can make right.  

It just seems that Bioware is starting to lose its narrative strong points, and instead will be focusing on making Action games, and FPS. 

DA:O started with you as a normal Person, that was thrown into events that shaped your character and personality. You were an unknown at first, but because of your involvement, suddenly the world is revolving around you, the world is now changing based on your decisions. I think Bioware is starting to forget it, and is now focusing on the Actions instead of Political and Social Dillema.

That is also the reason why I like Game of Thrones, not alot of action, but lots of scheming, and plotting. If they can put those in, it will make Dragon Age 3 great.

Seconded.

[Rawgrim]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Rawgrim wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

In DAO, out of nearly 80+ hours gameplay with all DLC.. only about 1hour was race specific, if that.. and that was mostly the first 40mins of the game, the other 20mins was the total collection of "omg your a elf"

It hardly added that much re-playability, sure the choice is nice, but really your only choice is a aesthetic avatar.

Has to do with actual roleplaying, not what the game tells you. How would your dwarf noble solve this and that, or react to this and that etc. You create a character and put yourself in hisher shoes.

Ironically the backgrounds mattered more than the races in that regard, considering that backgrounds tend to shape how your character can act or what they can do in typical RPG parlance, over racial traits and what not.

You notice with the Mass Effect multiplayer the emphasis is on classes over race. The races have different base stat traits but the classes have different powers and stat distribution, making them all wholly unique in most regards to how they can be built, how they can be used, and so forth. So a Volus Engineer will always have different functions over a Human one, while a Vorcha soldier may be a close-quarters fighter instead of the Turian soldier, who deals death at a distance.

That, to me, is a better role-playing experience because you have a background that determines more about your character than their race. So being a human noble vs a human fisherman might give you a different perspective, over being a human noble and an elven fisherman. The elf part is irrelevent because the fisherman aspect takes precedence. 

In Thedas, though, your race determines your background. So i am 50-50 with you on that argument. I see your point, and all that.

Well...the ME multiplayer doesn`t have anything to do with roleplaying, to be honest. You can pick "classes" while playing multiplayer on CoD too, but that doesn`t make it roleplaying. Roleplaying isn`t about functions in battle. That bit ties to the tactics bit. But yes, having different races have different variations of the classes is not a bad thing. Elven warriors don`t fight the way human warriors might do (in general). Still. All that should be up to the player to decide. Its the players character.

Actually, Id argue that Mass Effect 3's multiplayer is more Role-Playing than meets the eye.

Got to remember, role-playing for some people is just about utility in combat. Tons of power gamers and min-maxers would tell you otherwise how useful combative skills are and how they look to get that extra 5% bonus damage out of their characters vs social interaction. And the CoD classes are not fluid at all, they are basicaly excuses to call something a class by giving you starting equipment. And you got to remember, the equipment is what people use in CoD, not the character. 

Mass Effect differentiates by giving you specific powers for a job/class. The N7 Paladin is the only guy with the Omni-shield, for example. The Turian Ghost has a Tech Charge with the jetpack, and the Vorcha have blood lust. That allows you to play a role. It is in combat yes, but it still functions as the same way. It makes the characters unique outside of their use of weapons and extra equipment bonuses. That is something you don't see in Call of Duty, which basically makes the classes in that game pointless because they transform into a mash of everything in the end. 

And i'm not sure race determines your standing in Thedas. The only case you have is how elves are treated, but Dwarves and even Kossith kind of get the respect they deserve in the end, so I don't know if thats a major issue outside of Elven rights. 

The MP is still just about doing damage to waves of enemies. No rp involved at all. No dialogue either. If this is roleplaying to you, then Super Mario, Gears of War, Halo, and Unreal Tournament are also roleplaying. The "role" in roleplaying isn`t about the role you have in combat. Its about the role you as a person has, more or less. Wich is why loads of rp fans don`t consider Diablo to be an rpg. Its an action game with a tiny bit of rpg features in it.

As for players just doing minmaxing - they arn`t roleplaying, they are playing an rts. Simple as that.

Play some table-tops, a lot of people I used to game with would tell you otherwise, much to my chagrin since I liked talking my way out of situations or using illusion magic. 

The "role" part is so subjective there is no definition, hence why the answer to this question is both right and wrong; it is both your role in a combat situation, and the role your character has through their persona.

Those RP fans who don't consider Diablo and RPG are basically incorrect, because by that definition than most RPG's out there, including a majority of BioWare's catalgoue, are not RPG games by such a narrow margin.

And that is a poor definition of things to begin with, kind of like how the "JRPG" term tells us nothing about an RPG, except the perception of what a JRPG is. It's a terrible term that catalogues games for us, and makes no sense in the process. 

Played table-top rpgs since the late 80s, mate.

Adding the "role" into combat started with WoW, where it was all about having some certain duty to the group during a fight.

Seriously? A majority of Bioware`s rpgs are like Diablo? Can you solve a quest in Diablo in more than one way? Will your actions change the story in any way? or is the story utterly set in stone in Diablo? You don`t even have dialogue options in Diablo. Diablo is as far from a bioware game as you can possibly get. Its like comparing Tetris to Skyrim.

JRPG is a term for rpgs made in Japan. Simple as that.