587 réponses à ce sujet

[kobayashi-maru]

For me - not the biggest RPG fan - I understand the problems some people have with the scaled down mechanics of ME3, but have different view.

I don't believe ME3 got it quite right but I understand why they scaled down some things and why it doesn't reflect on the future of the Company. Mass Effect needed more options in the first game because it was a new IP as the trilogy progressed it was less about exploration and more about war. In ME3 I missed some of the dialogue options but being honest I get the deletion of the middle option on dialogue wheel. During a war it's time to get off the fence, there is not any middle option. It could have been done slightly better in places to distinguish more between the Paragon/Renegade choices but as a whole it worked. Also I understand they had to include multiple characters dialogue so budget was tight, and playing as a Paragon/Save Kaiden Shep, there are so many characters I didn't get to meet or have extended conversations with, but they are in the game for some.

Dragon Age etc will never scale down to the ME style because it is a very different beast. It doesn't need the mass export of previous game story to be added, nor is the combat ever going to go the same as ME primarily because of the lack of guns and different combat style of the franchise.

How ME3 would work using anything other than a Gears of War style mechanic escapes me, it needs it, and I much prefer combat in 3 than in the previous games.

The easiest way to look as it is compare Bioware to Disney. Disney makes mostly child friendly things which follow a simple basic mechanic. But they also make movies that are nothing like 'classic' disney and go there own direction. Bioware is the same, they make RPG's but the amount of classic RPG features can be low or high depending on the game. What works in one game won't in another.

And for what it's worth the only place in ME3 I think they really failed was the lack of choices being reflected in final Earth mission. Apart from that it works - though would rather have had the main missions mixed more together, rather than complete 1 move on to next one aspect.

[EnvyTB075]

xsdob wrote...

CD Projekt Red is making a cool looking sci-fi rpg in 3 or more years, should be very good.

And its going to be pretty ****ing cool.

kobayashi-maru wrote...
Gears of War style mechanic escapes me, it needs it.

No it didn't, ME2's combat was perfectly fine and all it needed was refinement in the cover detection and similar issues.

And before you say it, ME3's combat was NOT a "refinement" of ME2's, it was a complete overhaul to ensure it appealed to the CoD crowd, in the same way BF3's fast gameplay is intrinsically worse than BF2's slowly more thoughtful approach, in which only Planetside 2 has managed to emulate and its a ****ing F2P game.

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 15 janvier 2013 - 03:39 .

[kobayashi-maru]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

CD Projekt Red is making a cool looking sci-fi rpg in 3 or more years, should be very good.

And its going to be pretty ****ing cool.

kobayashi-maru wrote...
Gears of War style mechanic escapes me, it needs it.

No it didn't, ME2's combat was perfectly fine and all it needed was refinement in the cover detection and similar issues.

And before you say it, ME3's combat was NOT a "refinement" of ME2's, it was a complete overhaul to ensure it appealed to the CoD crowd, in the same way BF3's fast gameplay is intrinsically worse than BF2's slowly more thoughtful approach, in which only Planetside 2 has managed to emulate and its a ****ing F2P game.

I get your point it's a matter of personal preference. I don't disagree with you I just prefer the GOW mechanics in 3, but can understand why others prefer the ME2 style. But it could be also to do with how people play the game, I am more a run and gun, while diving in and out of cover player, while others use powers more. For a more power reliant character the ME2 mechanic probably would be better.

[Oni Changas]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

CD Projekt Red is making a cool looking sci-fi rpg in 3 or more years, should be very good.

And its going to be pretty ****ing cool.

kobayashi-maru wrote...
Gears of War style mechanic escapes me, it needs it.

No it didn't, ME2's combat was perfectly fine and all it needed was refinement in the cover detection and similar issues.

And before you say it, ME3's combat was NOT a "refinement" of ME2's, it was a complete overhaul to ensure it appealed to the CoD crowd, in the same way BF3's fast gameplay is intrinsically worse than BF2's slowly more thoughtful approach, in which only Planetside 2 has managed to emulate and its a ****ing F2P game.

Hate the game all you want, but keep the bashing rational. In no way is any previous ME games' gameplay mechanics (not including global cooldown or powers) better than ME3's. Control is much better, Shepard can actually dodge like a soldier and can fight back in melee range on top of stealth kills and cover-to-cover rolls.

[dreman9999]

Gulaman wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

Nope me3 is still an RPG

It has some RPG elements but it's really a shooter game. Bioware went down this route due to the MP aspect of the game. 

Some? I think you need to look at what it has agein.

aLSO, NOTE THAT IT'S AN ACTION RPG.

[dreman9999]

EnvyTB075 wrote...



No it didn't, ME2's combat was perfectly fine and all it needed was refinement in the cover detection and similar issues.

And before you say it, ME3's combat was NOT a "refinement" of ME2's, it was a complete overhaul to ensure it appealed to the CoD crowd, in the same way BF3's fast gameplay is intrinsically worse than BF2's slowly more thoughtful approach, in which only Planetside 2 has managed to emulate and its a ****ing F2P game.

What?

The power system was underpowered and limited. It bearly had weapons and armor. The movement is slugest. The eneimies are unbalance....And It still has the charge glich. 

[dreman9999]

kobayashi-maru wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

xsdob wrote...

CD Projekt Red is making a cool looking sci-fi rpg in 3 or more years, should be very good.

And its going to be pretty ****ing cool.

kobayashi-maru wrote...
Gears of War style mechanic escapes me, it needs it.

No it didn't, ME2's combat was perfectly fine and all it needed was refinement in the cover detection and similar issues.

And before you say it, ME3's combat was NOT a "refinement" of ME2's, it was a complete overhaul to ensure it appealed to the CoD crowd, in the same way BF3's fast gameplay is intrinsically worse than BF2's slowly more thoughtful approach, in which only Planetside 2 has managed to emulate and its a ****ing F2P game.

I get your point it's a matter of personal preference. I don't disagree with you I just prefer the GOW mechanics in 3, but can understand why others prefer the ME2 style. But it could be also to do with how people play the game, I am more a run and gun, while diving in and out of cover player, while others use powers more. For a more power reliant character the ME2 mechanic probably would be better.

Powers related, ME2 is wors then ME3. The class I'm best at is the adept and it got the shaft in ME2. The fact you had to take down defences for them to be fully effective made the class trouble some.(Taking about biotic explotions.)
In ME3, now I have mutiple ways  to attack.
In ME2, to befully effective you had to shot or spam throw to take down defences, then lift or use singularity to prep for a warp bomb.
Now in ME3, we have warp+throw/reave/slam/biotic grenade/cluster grenade/barrier exlotion/shockwave combos and so on.Added with each power with elaberated evolutions that make a differance to how they are built.

ME3 Impove the combat for ME, both rpg wise and action wise.

[EnvyTB075]

OniTYME wrote...
]Hate the game all you want, but keep the bashing rational. In no way is any previous ME games' gameplay mechanics (not including global cooldown or powers) better than ME3's. Control is much better, Shepard can actually dodge like a soldier and can fight back in melee range on top of stealth kills and cover-to-cover rolls.

Please show me the footage of any real world soldier performing combat rolls, dives and with the anabolic threshold to sprint forever. Oh thats right, you can't, because thats not what "soldiers" do.

Contrary to popular belief, war isn't as fast as games promote. ME2 was a far more accurate depiction of a military fighting force than ME3 could ever hope to be.

kobayashi-maru wrote...
I get your point it's a
matter of personal preference. I don't disagree with you I just prefer
the GOW mechanics in 3, but can understand why others prefer the ME2
style. But it could be also to do with how people play the game, I am
more a run and gun, while diving in and out of cover player, while
others use powers more. For a more power reliant character the ME2
mechanic probably would be better.

Apologies for the heavy wording, I just have an extreme repulsion to the amount of dumbing down many great tactical shooters are getting to appeal to the "run and gun" mentality.  The Ubisoft trio (R6, GR and SC), Operation Flashpoint, Battlefield.

However your assertion that power users will find ME2's gameplay mechanics more favourable is blatently wrong. ME2 promoted a mixture of power/weapon use, using powers to strip enemies of defenses so you could take down health rapidly with your weapons. In ME3 you just pick the lightest weapons available and utterly spam your powers, and this contributed to the difficulty, in which it is so incredibly easy on insanity is rather shameful.

Because the player now moves at an incredibly enhanced and disproportionate speed considering you're practically wearing the armour of a Knight, they had to buff enemies the same way in turn. This makes previously difficult but satisfying enemies incredibly erratic in their difficulty, which can range from ****** easy to infuriatingly cheap and dumb on a moments notice (the executions).

Don't mistake that however for hating the Gears mechanic entirely. See the thing is I like it, in Gears where it belongs. Like every other gameplay mechanic that was copy and pasted into other games in the effort of netting the more popular games' playerbase, it made the game worse and removed the individual identity that series built up with its gameplay.

I'm just sick and tired of playing the same games over and over again in a different skin, hence my bitterness.

dreman9999 wrote...

What?

The power system was
underpowered and limited. It bearly had weapons and armor. The movement
is slugest. The eneimies are unbalance....And It still has the charge
glich. 

Hey, moron, i never said it was utterly perfect, but it was a damn sight more fun than ME3 due to the vastly more tactical design in ALL areas rather than just the one in ME3.

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 15 janvier 2013 - 04:34 .

[dreman9999]

EnvyTB075 wrote...



Hey, moron, i never said it was utterly perfect, but it was a damn sight more fun than ME3 due to the vastly more tactical design in ALL areas rather than just the one in ME3.

More tactical design my foot. Your AI allies mess up most of the time. You have a vastly limit way of using power compared to ME3. And you have a vastly limited way of developing your characters in ME2 compared to ME3. Please, explain to me how a rpg wit powers that only have each power have a 2 variation to chooses, a limit weapon and armor system, ad limit use of mixing abilities is more tatical then an rpg with vastly more weapons and armor,with each power having 6 variation of evolutions to choose, better allie AI, and a system that have a mixing of power combos and variations due to lacing enemies with effects and allowing other powers to trigger them reguard less of being biotic attacks, teck attacks, or weapon?

[Galbrant]

We're like a big ole Mandalorian family. We're rude to each other but we all find love with this dysfunctional family. If the Skirata Clan can do it so can we.

[xsdob]

I want revan to deal with this family.

But that might be because I feel sorry the cather and all the other races.

Modifié par xsdob, 15 janvier 2013 - 05:10 .

[DirtySHISN0]

Inventory systems within RPGs is one of my favourite features, I love the customisation it allows.

Feel so much more immersed when i can control such miniscule things for a character.

[Argolas]

I also miss loot. To me, being able to loot your enemies is one of the most RPG-y things ever.

[Ameno Xiel]

I think that it's purely subjective when asked "what" is a RPG.

For me it's so that I play Mass Effect as an action game with RPG-"elements". Nothing more, nothing less. That doesn't make ME a full RPG in many ways. At least in my opinion.

If I want to play oldschool RPG I go with (the Enhanced Edition from) Baldur's Gate.
If I want to play a new "classic" RPG I go with the Witcher franchise.
If I want to play a completely new take on RPG's I go with the Secret World.

Either way, RPGs come in many ways these days.

I don't even agree that Biowares' get worse. It's just that I think they aren't as original. Those few RPG-"elements" that would have been sufficient in the past, deliver now a "been there, done that" feeling. And that is just not enough nowadays.

[CynicalShep]

Well, it says it all when I enjoy the ancient minecraft-graphics Kotor games more than ME3

[Argolas]

CynicalShep wrote...

Well, it says it all when I enjoy the ancient minecraft-graphics Kotor games more than ME3

No, that only says something about your preferences.

Also, minecraft can look pretty good with "256*256" textures.

[AlanC9]

Argolas wrote...

I also miss loot. To me, being able to loot your enemies is one of the most RPG-y things ever.

And to me loot for loot's sake is one of the problems with the CRPG tradition. Which proves nothing at all except that different RPG players like different things about RPGs. I'm starting to think that the concept of an "RPG" genre ought to be scrapped outright.

[Sajuro]

I'm glad that Mass Effect got rid of the absurd inventory, instead giving weapons that have a different feeling to them. Also I didn't mind not having to play dress up with my squad mates, hell if you could put different armor but their outfit remained the same I would like that since I don't have to worry about balancing stats with something that looks cool (Even in First Person Role Playing Games, I cannot suffer to have my characters run around in something that isn't cool or aesthetically pleasing) The one thing I would like is if DA2 changed companions outfits like to reflect the rigid boning you gave Isabella (the upgrade, not the sexy time)

[zyntifox]

For me whether a game is an RPG or not is determined by if i can roleplay in it or not. And for me it comes down to my control over the protagonists words and actions. All other things things that are considered "RPG-elements" such as loot and skills are just cosmetics. These "RPG-elements" surely can enhance the RPG experience but only if i am in control of the protagonists words and actions.

For me ME1 does not even qualify as a RPG; i consider it a interactive action/adventure game. The reason for this is simply because i cannot roleplay in it due to the guessing game that is the dialogue system. However, it is still in my top 5 games ever played. I really wish i could roleplay in it, and i am envious of those who can, but sadly i cannot.

[Sajuro]

Cstaf wrote...

For me whether a game is an RPG or not is determined by if i can roleplay in it or not. And for me it comes down to my control over the protagonists words and actions. All other things things that are considered "RPG-elements" such as loot and skills are just cosmetics. These "RPG-elements" surely can enhance the RPG experience but only if i am in control of the protagonists words and actions.

For me ME1 does not even qualify as a RPG; i consider it a interactive action/adventure game. The reason for this is simply because i cannot roleplay in it due to the guessing game that is the dialogue system. However, it is still in my top 5 games ever played. I really wish i could roleplay in it, and i am envious of those who can, but sadly i cannot.

Do what I do, roleplay motivations for what Shep says, what he does with squadmates when the game is covering them. Why he always gets drunk before driving the Mako and his eventual slide into insanity.

[Argolas]

AlanC9 wrote...

Argolas wrote...

I also miss loot. To me, being able to loot your enemies is one of the most RPG-y things ever.

And to me loot for loot's sake is one of the problems with the CRPG tradition. Which proves nothing at all except that different RPG players like different things about RPGs. I'm starting to think that the concept of an "RPG" genre ought to be scrapped outright.

You know, I wrote "to me" for a reason. It's just my opinion.
I enjoy hunting rare loot in my RPGs and there's nothing bad about that unless you consider it too "video-gamey". For example, I really enjoyed how you had to hunt down certain monsters and create killing chains in order to improve your chances of getting the rare loot. When you finally have everything, you sell a few of material A, B and C to a merchant so you get material D which is part of one of the most powerful weapons in the game.

Since this is an experience I only found in RPGs thus far, I consider this being part of the RPG genre. I also don't know many RPGs that are completely without loot like ME2 and ME3 are. Dragon Age 2 was also a huge step down since it reduced most loot to crap you can only sell ("loot for loots sake" as you put it). Origins had materials to collect which you could use to craft potions, traps and stuff, in DA2, you only find them once and after that, it's again all about money, you completely lose the crafting things vs. buying things part that also means something to me as one aspect of a RPG.

[Femlob]

xsdob wrote...

@femlob, that last part better not be directed at me. >:{

Only if you want it to be. He who fits the shoe should try it on, and all that.

Leonardo the Magnificent wrote...

Can you even see the ground from atop that horse of yours? Or is it so covered in the "filth of the masses" that there's no ground left to see?

I guess you fit the shoe, then.

Would that elitism came with ear muffs.

[xsdob]

Femlob wrote...

xsdob wrote...

@femlob, that last part better not be directed at me. >:{

Only if you want it to be. He who fits the shoe should try it on, and all that.

Leonardo the Magnificent wrote...

Can you even see the ground from atop that horse of yours? Or is it so covered in the "filth of the masses" that there's no ground left to see?

I guess you fit the shoe, then.

Would that elitism came with ear muffs.

Your kinda a dick, and this is coming from someone who is dickish in the way he post.

I play many different types of games and don't just shoehorn myself into a single genre though, so no matter which way the gaming industries winds blow, I can adapt and find pleasure easily.

Though after you claimed that I was a incompetant person who throws his excrement, I find myself being much less sympathetic towards you and wishing you much less well wishes in finding another game series or company you would enjoy.

[Smashmouth]

It's all about the impact of choices in the post DA: origins era. While the games and story may be good, it doesnt leave us with the satisfaction of knowing its the ending we chose like the good ol days

[Sajuro]

I'm just going to leave this here, from the Daggerfall Manual

People who play role-playing games need more than some pretty graphics and non-stop action to whet their claymores: They want depth and character and wit and drama. They want the thickest most involving novel that they’ve ever read translated to their 15” screen, with themselves as the hero. That’s why I love people who play role-playing games. They’re so reasonable.