587 réponses à ce sujet

[Obitim]

Maniccc wrote...

Do you remember when Bioware first started out and the level of RPG they created?

Yep

Who remembers Baldurs Gate and BG 2?

Me. Hated them, total yawnfest.

Who played through Neverwinter Nights with a variety of character types?

Hated it, yawnfest.

Who remember Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic?

First BW game I played that I liked was KOTOR. It was very silly, though, I about died laughing when my obviously Sith character was getting trained to be a Jedi, with my pale skin, popping veins and yellow eyes.

Who blitzed through Jade Empire?

I did not like this as much as KOTOR, but I enjoyed it.

Who remembers ME 1 and DA:O?

ME1, I liked. DA:O...yawnfest.

Your point being?

[Seival]

Chris Priestly wrote...

I have worked on every game we've made since the end of Baldur's Gate Throne of Bhaal. EVERY time we make a game, someone complains it isn't as "RPG" as the one previously. NwN wasn't BG, KotOR wasn't NwN, Jade wasn't KotOR, ME wasn't Jade, etc.

RPG is not static, RPG changes and evolves. Fallout 3 is not the same game as Fallout. Dragon Age: Origins is not the same game as Baldur's Gate. There is no hard, set rule as to what an RPG must be (beyond letting you play a role and it being a game, I suppose) or contain. That "YOU" (whoever you is) enjoys XYZ features and "THEY" liek ABC features does not mean that a game that does or does not include those features is any more or less an RPG. Yes, it absolutely may be less of an RPG in the mind of someone who wants ABC features, but gets XYZ features, but that does not change the inherant RPGness of the game.

Now we're arguing about "art" (as a methapor, stick with me here). Is the Mona Lisa art? Sure, it's awesome, historic, beautiful, etc. Is Warhol's Soup art? No! It's simple, childish, ugly, etc. This is the mind of the person perceiving it. They are both art, just different art. BG2 is an RPG, so is ME3. They are different, but they are also the same.

I've been waiting for such official response for so long.

Thank you.

ME3 is indeed role playing game (just like ME1 and ME2). I don't really understand people who say otherwise.

[Maniccc]

Obitim wrote...

Maniccc wrote...

Do you remember when Bioware first started out and the level of RPG they created?

Yep

Who remembers Baldurs Gate and BG 2?

Me. Hated them, total yawnfest.

Who played through Neverwinter Nights with a variety of character types?

Hated it, yawnfest.

Who remember Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic?

First BW game I played that I liked was KOTOR. It was very silly, though, I about died laughing when my obviously Sith character was getting trained to be a Jedi, with my pale skin, popping veins and yellow eyes.

Who blitzed through Jade Empire?

I did not like this as much as KOTOR, but I enjoyed it.

Who remembers ME 1 and DA:O?

ME1, I liked. DA:O...yawnfest.

Your point being?

Thought it was obvious...my pespective tends be the opposite of the OP....  I edited my OP garding whetehr or not ME3 is an RPG, though (it is).

[Obitim]

Maniccc wrote...

Obitim wrote...

Maniccc wrote...

Do you remember when Bioware first started out and the level of RPG they created?

Yep

Who remembers Baldurs Gate and BG 2?

Me. Hated them, total yawnfest.

Who played through Neverwinter Nights with a variety of character types?

Hated it, yawnfest.

Who remember Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic?

First BW game I played that I liked was KOTOR. It was very silly, though, I about died laughing when my obviously Sith character was getting trained to be a Jedi, with my pale skin, popping veins and yellow eyes.

Who blitzed through Jade Empire?

I did not like this as much as KOTOR, but I enjoyed it.

Who remembers ME 1 and DA:O?

ME1, I liked. DA:O...yawnfest.

Your point being?

Thought it was obvious...my pespective tends be the opposite of the OP....  I edited my OP garding whetehr or not ME3 is an RPG, though (it is).

yeah, I suppose, however, I'd be inclined to say that you're not an RPG fan in the classical sense (loot/stats) but over time maybe you'll appreciate these other games (maybe as you age, although i have no idea how old you are!)

[StarcloudSWG]

Chris Priestly wrote...

I have worked on every game we've made since the end of Baldur's Gate Throne of Bhaal. EVERY time we make a game, someone complains it isn't as "RPG" as the one previously. NwN wasn't BG, KotOR wasn't NwN, Jade wasn't KotOR, ME wasn't Jade, etc.

RPG is not static, RPG changes and evolves. Fallout 3 is not the same game as Fallout. Dragon Age: Origins is not the same game as Baldur's Gate. There is no hard, set rule as to what an RPG must be (beyond letting you play a role and it being a game, I suppose) or contain. That "YOU" (whoever you is) enjoys XYZ features and "THEY" liek ABC features does not mean that a game that does or does not include those features is any more or less an RPG. Yes, it absolutely may be less of an RPG in the mind of someone who wants ABC features, but gets XYZ features, but that does not change the inherant RPGness of the game.

Now we're arguing about "art" (as a methapor, stick with me here). Is the Mona Lisa art? Sure, it's awesome, historic, beautiful, etc. Is Warhol's Soup art? No! It's simple, childish, ugly, etc. This is the mind of the person perceiving it. They are both art, just different art. BG2 is an RPG, so is ME3. They are different, but they are also the same.

In the specific case of the direction Mass Effect 3 development went with Omega, it is clear that the multiplayer shooty shooty all the time aspect is slowly, inch by inch, taking over. The constant pressure to 'get the mission done' which is enforced by the mission, level, spawn design and NPC dialog constantly urging Shepard to get to the next objective, is precluding the ability to take time to look around and poke into corners, to SEE the environment the graphic artists have placed.

Being thrown immediately from one mission into the next, as happens in the Omega DLC, also contributes to the slow creep towards being entirely a TPS game. The Multiplayer Studio does not understand story pacing, only combat pacing.

Modifié par StarcloudSWG, 14 janvier 2013 - 09:10 .

[frostajulie]

I agree that after DAO and ME1 Bioware stopped making good RPG's. They still made good games but they were not RPGs and definitely not of the caliber of their predecessors. I love ME2 and DA2 was fun for the $20 I spent soooo glad I did not pay full price. But ME3 is not an RPG it is a cinematic shooter game with some rpg elements. The streamlined linear nature of this game was a real let down but one that could have been forgiven if they had ended it right.

Sadly I do not think this company even knows how to make an RPG anymore. Trust me I would love to be wrong about that. But I still play DAO and ME1 and even ME2 those are some immersive experiences but levelling in ME2 was definitely a step down from ME1

[Grubas]

David7204 wrote...

Are you capable of understand something called 'cause and effect.'? Because it sure doesn't look like it when you post comments like that.

I am. What about you? 

The breather masks have nothing to do with the change in armor systems.

Glad you point that out. Infact a good armor system would allow me to change the helmet/breathermask on my squadmates, a bad system would leave me with a predefined solution, like a silly breathermask i can't do anything about.

ME 3 has fewer skills than ME 1 because many of ME 1's skills were nearly worthless. I object. As I said, fake depth. I object.  The armor skill that gives 1% more damage protection per point. The medicine skill that had medi-gel recharge a second faster per point. I object heavily.

ME1 offers you a system that leaves it up to you to finetune your character. That way every character you create is unique. Every char is different, hardly any is perfect. Depending on how you tune your character certain parts of the game become challenging, smooth to handle, or just unreachable... Its up to you. ME1 is a RPG. Traditionally it offers you many more options then you ever will use. Doesnt mean they are useless though.

ME 3 does things right by integrating those bonuses into other skills and beefing them up so they actually have an impact.

 It oversimplifies things. Whatever.

Modifié par Grubas, 14 janvier 2013 - 09:16 .

[Obitim]

Yeah, I agree, ME3 isn't a bad game. it;s just not a good RPG, it is a good game though

[ioannisdenton]

DA2 had way more complex story and sidequests (NOT the eavesdropping) than Me3.
Da2 had a decent story. Epic? no! Decent yes.
Me3 was SHOOTING galery so Mr priestley i think your are kinda wrong.
i consider myself open minded but your are wrong

[Maniccc]

Obitim wrote...


yeah, I suppose, however, I'd be inclined to say that you're not an RPG fan in the classical sense (loot/stats) but over time maybe you'll appreciate these other games (maybe as you age, although i have no idea how old you are!)

I'm old....hahaha.  I'll put it this way, I was playing video games before home video game systems existed.

Though I suppose I should say this:

An RPG is about playing a role in a world that is subject to change based on choices the player makes.  That, to me, is the essence of what an RPG is, everything else is just trappings; gameplay mechanics, aesthetics, etc., that create a system and virtual space in which we can do that.

[Lars Honeytoast]

I like the reply Priestly, and it's pretty much in line with my way of thinking.


As long as I can build my character's skills up, I consider it an RPG. Loot has never been a must, but I do like it. As I've grown older, I've found out I need a more entertaining combat system (as opposed to turn based). ME3 really found a great medium for me with story, action, and stat building. Yes, I'm calling the skills stats. I'm no purist.

[EagleScoutDJB]

Chris Priestly wrote...

I have worked on every game we've made since the end of Baldur's Gate Throne of Bhaal. EVERY time we make a game, someone complains it isn't as "RPG" as the one previously. NwN wasn't BG, KotOR wasn't NwN, Jade wasn't KotOR, ME wasn't Jade, etc.

RPG is not static, RPG changes and evolves. Fallout 3 is not the same game as Fallout. Dragon Age: Origins is not the same game as Baldur's Gate. There is no hard, set rule as to what an RPG must be (beyond letting you play a role and it being a game, I suppose) or contain. That "YOU" (whoever you is) enjoys XYZ features and "THEY" liek ABC features does not mean that a game that does or does not include those features is any more or less an RPG. Yes, it absolutely may be less of an RPG in the mind of someone who wants ABC features, but gets XYZ features, but that does not change the inherant RPGness of the game.

Now we're arguing about "art" (as a methapor, stick with me here). Is the Mona Lisa art? Sure, it's awesome, historic, beautiful, etc. Is Warhol's Soup art? No! It's simple, childish, ugly, etc. This is the mind of the person perceiving it. They are both art, just different art. BG2 is an RPG, so is ME3. They are different, but they are also the same.

I guess my opinion of Mass Effect 2 and 3 is just colered by the fact that the first Mass Effect is one of my all time favorite games, most of the changes made between games actualy took away from my enjoyment of each game.  That's not to say I felt like all of the changes were bad just that each game is a step down in the qualty of the game for me.

[Lars Honeytoast]

Maniccc wrote...

Obitim wrote...


yeah, I suppose, however, I'd be inclined to say that you're not an RPG fan in the classical sense (loot/stats) but over time maybe you'll appreciate these other games (maybe as you age, although i have no idea how old you are!)

I'm old....hahaha.  I'll put it this way, I was playing video games before home video game systems existed.

Though I suppose I should say this:

An RPG is about playing a role in a world that is subject to change based on choices the player makes.  That, to me, is the essence of what an RPG is, everything else is just trappings; gameplay mechanics, aesthetics, etc., that create a system and virtual space in which we can do that.

Quick question, do you consider JRPGs, such as the Final Fantasies, RPGs? There's really no choices in some of those, but I still consider them RPGs. I'm not as old as you (not meant to be a slight), so maybe you have a more traditional definition of RPG, but I grew up on Square RPGs, so choice was never really as important as playing a given role.

[Zekka]

All I have to say is that if people think Mass Effect 3 is an RPG then how would you compare it as an RPG to DA:O, ME1, Witcher 2, Skyrim, Fallout 3. Bioware made some of the best RPG's before so Mass Effect 3 shouldn't have been an exception. Just because the game has action or a good combat doesn't mean the game should be any less of an rpg than its predecessor. Dark Souls, Dragon's Dogma and Kingdoms of Amalur have good combat and they are more of an RPG than Mass Effect 3 is, so what is Bioware's excuse.

[Obitim]

Maniccc wrote...

Obitim wrote...


yeah, I suppose, however, I'd be inclined to say that you're not an RPG fan in the classical sense (loot/stats) but over time maybe you'll appreciate these other games (maybe as you age, although i have no idea how old you are!)

I'm old....hahaha.  I'll put it this way, I was playing video games before home video game systems existed.

Though I suppose I should say this:

An RPG is about playing a role in a world that is subject to change based on choices the player makes.  That, to me, is the essence of what an RPG is, everything else is just trappings; gameplay mechanics, aesthetics, etc., that create a system and virtual space in which we can do that.

I thought you were younger!  I stand corrected!

Good point  though,  suppose the basics are all there.  Just not in the ways I like!  Dammit!

Seriously, I like the game, just not as much as ME and previous works by BW.

[Maniccc]

Lars Honeytoast wrote...

Maniccc wrote...

Obitim wrote...


yeah, I suppose, however, I'd be inclined to say that you're not an RPG fan in the classical sense (loot/stats) but over time maybe you'll appreciate these other games (maybe as you age, although i have no idea how old you are!)

I'm old....hahaha.  I'll put it this way, I was playing video games before home video game systems existed.

Though I suppose I should say this:

An RPG is about playing a role in a world that is subject to change based on choices the player makes.  That, to me, is the essence of what an RPG is, everything else is just trappings; gameplay mechanics, aesthetics, etc., that create a system and virtual space in which we can do that.

Quick question, do you consider JRPGs, such as the Final Fantasies, RPGs? There's really no choices in some of those, but I still consider them RPGs. I'm not as old as you (not meant to be a slight), so maybe you have a more traditional definition of RPG, but I grew up on Square RPGs, so choice was never really as important as playing a given role.

Well, I actually grew up on table top RPGs, and back then we had two types of RPG gamers:  the Powergamers, and the Roleplayers.  Powergamers were all about loot and stats, and the Computer RPGs (PC or console) were based on this version.  The Roleplayers (of which I was a "member", as it were) were more interested in character development and the stories of our characters.  When I say "character development" I am talking more about the personality, the learning, the growth, and such of the character.  This does not mean we never cared about skills or loot at all, it was a matter of priority and focus.

I don't really consider JRPGs in general to be RPGs.  To me, JRPGs are more like stories through which you play, kind of like GTA games (but with lots more loot and skills and none of the fun, fast paced action).

I used to like JRPGs, but got tired of them a long time ago because I lost interest in the combat and random encounters.  I like some excitement and speed in my gameplay.

[RedCaesar97]

Do you remember when Bioware first started out and the level of RPG they created? No.

Who remembers Baldurs Gate and BG 2? Never played them.

Who played through Neverwinter Nights with a variety of character types? Never played it.

Who remember Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic? Never played it.

Who blitzed through Jade Empire? Loved that game. I must have played it about a dozen times.

Who remembers ME 1 and DA:O? I have played ME1 about 2 dozen times. Never played any Dragon Age games.

Who remembers when ME2 came out and thought the following:
 - Why can't I pick armour for Sheperd and my team? Never thought that for a moment.
 - Why are there so few weapons to pick up? Never thought that for a moment. Fewer weapons, but each weapon was unique and most were balanced and viable.
 - What happened to all those weapon mods I could add? So glad those were removed.
 - How come I only have about 6 skills I can progress? in ME 1 there were at least twice that many. Twice as many skills in ME1, but only two builds per class. That ME1 skill tree was intimidating if you did not know what you were doing, and no way to reset or respec your skills. All builds end up looking the same. 

Compare this to ME2 where you may have fewer skills, but you can evolve those skills to one of two evolutions. Also, with fewer skill points to spend than powers, you have more unique builds and playstyles. And you could respec your points to try out different builds and playstyles. The classes were more balanced and with the introduction of class-unique powers, it made each class feel unique. Compare that with ME1 where Infiltrator could be a better Soldier and/or Engineer, and Vanguard could be a better Adept.


Who thought that ME3 would change these missteps when it was said customisation would be back? What missteps?

What happened to the dialogue wheel? It is still there.

Why can't I still upgrade the armour for my squad and instead only change the colour and about 2 maybe 3 bonus' that it gives? Because it still allows squadmates to maintain an individual personality than just "Squadmate in Colossus armor.

Why can I no longer do a bit of exploration while stopping the reapers? (People say that the galaxy is at war but DA:O managed to accomplish this with the dark spawn?) Oh yes, please wait while I do some sightseeing while the Reapers destroy the entire galaxy. That is sarcasm.

Why can't the multiplayer upgrades be included in the main game?  I'd love to do a couple of missions around earth (even if it's just defence or seek and destry like the current Mp maps). What upgrades are you talking about? The weapon mods have been introduced in the Leviathan and Omega DLCs. With DLC, the Single Player has more weapons. Only multiplayer has more powers, but they are hardly game-changing.

I suppose the big question I'm asking is do you think that since EA has taken over this fine firm, has quality dipped for them?  Are we seeing corners being cut in order to hit a deadline?  Are the things which made the games from this firm unique being taken out and 'streamlined' in order to appeal to the COD/GOW crowd? No, No, and No.

Mass Effect 2 is currently my favorite game of all time. Mass Effect 3 had a lot of unfulfilled potential, but for me it is for different reasons than for you. All companies have deadlines, some things must suffer for those deadlines. And oh yeah, the original release date for Mass Effect 3 was pushed back a few months to give it more completion time. 

I feel that the last 'true' Bioware game that I played was DA:O.  ME2 was a great game, but it wasn't a game created by the Bioware that I grew up with.

I appreciate that companies have to change with the times in order to keep going, but there's plenty of demand for RPG's out there so wht did Bioware decide to create 3rd person shooters and hack and slash action RPG's? BioWare, and every other game company, cannot keep making the same games otherwise they become stale oever time. BioWare has continued to try to evolve their series and games to experiment and try new things. Sometimes those changes work out, sometimes they do not, but I like that BioWare has tried to continue to evolve their games instead of just Game B = Game ! reskinned.

Modifié par RedCaesar97, 14 janvier 2013 - 09:43 .

[Mathias]

Seival wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

I have worked on every game we've made since the end of Baldur's Gate Throne of Bhaal. EVERY time we make a game, someone complains it isn't as "RPG" as the one previously. NwN wasn't BG, KotOR wasn't NwN, Jade wasn't KotOR, ME wasn't Jade, etc.

RPG is not static, RPG changes and evolves. Fallout 3 is not the same game as Fallout. Dragon Age: Origins is not the same game as Baldur's Gate. There is no hard, set rule as to what an RPG must be (beyond letting you play a role and it being a game, I suppose) or contain. That "YOU" (whoever you is) enjoys XYZ features and "THEY" liek ABC features does not mean that a game that does or does not include those features is any more or less an RPG. Yes, it absolutely may be less of an RPG in the mind of someone who wants ABC features, but gets XYZ features, but that does not change the inherant RPGness of the game.

Now we're arguing about "art" (as a methapor, stick with me here). Is the Mona Lisa art? Sure, it's awesome, historic, beautiful, etc. Is Warhol's Soup art? No! It's simple, childish, ugly, etc. This is the mind of the person perceiving it. They are both art, just different art. BG2 is an RPG, so is ME3. They are different, but they are also the same.

I've been waiting for such official response for so long.

Thank you.

ME3 is indeed role playing game (just like ME1 and ME2). I don't really understand people who say otherwise.

Uh because it's not.

People have to at least agree that ME3 was more shooter than it was an RPG.

[Mathias]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Gixxer6Rdr wrote...

And to Chris Priestly, you keep talking about art, but the thing is you promised us gamers certain things, which makes it, the game, 'commissioned' art. You then do not have the right to the not deliver on what you promised, PERIOD!

Just picture Michelangelo instead of delivering on his promise painting the Sistine Chapel the picture of Andre the Giant. The whole art thing has no merit and is not an argument it's an excuse and a cheap 1 at that!

But you did get the things you were promised.  What didn't happen was your interpretation of that promise.

The Rachni are important, just not in the way that the portions of the fanbase were expecting.

What happened to ME3 is a simple case of developer delivery not meeting player expectation, which isn't necessarily the fault of the developer.

Oh god really? You're gonna be one of those guys?

See what you're doing is giving the "technically" argument. What's a technically argument? It's when somebody catches you in a lie, so you find a loophole in your previous statement so you can avoid being called a liar. Lemme give you an example;

Player: "Hey...you said there would be no A, B and C endings. But that's exactly what happened. We had three choices at the end. A for Destroy, B for Control, C for Synthesis."

Bioware: "Well.......TECHNICALLY if you stand around and do nothing for a few minutes, you'll end up getting a game over screen, which can be interpreted as a fourth option. So you see you really had a choice between A, B, C, and D!"

[Faust1979]

Of the Bioware games I've played Neverwinter Nights is the only one I really hated. Baldurs Gate 2 is kinda boring the game play is fine and I like the enviroments but the story sucks. I prefer the Xbox era of Bioware Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic all the way through Mass Effect 3. Kotor is the game that got me into Bioware and I loved every game since then in this era

[Faust1979]

jancz89 wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

Nope me3 is still an RPG

my eyes hurt, I can't....

I mean what?

tell me RPG aspect of ME3? what is there that is considered RPG?

leveling up, making choices in the game and feeling the consequences of your actions. Also there is plenty of ways to upgrade your weapons for people who love that kind of thing.

[Abraham_uk]

Bioware never made Role Playing Games.

Bioware made games with RPG features.

[RedCaesar97]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...
People have to at least agree that ME3 was more shooter than it was an RPG.

No. All modern RPGs have some form of combat. Mass Effect 3's combat is real-time TPS (Third Person Shooter).

[Robhuzz]

StayFrosty05 wrote...

The moment Auto Dialog became the order of the day and Choices no longer mattered....all RP went out the window.

Well you could still roleplay your Shepard. It just didn't lead anywhere as he was forced down bioware's road.

No. All modern RPGs have some form of combat. Mass Effect 3's combat is real-time TPS (Third Person Shooter).

This is true. However, ME3 had A LOT of focus on combat, more than anything else was it meant to look 'cool' and 'awesome'. With lots of action and an action mode that let you skip what little rpg elements remained. It did try to be a shooter more than an rpg. Then the auto dialogue, choices not doing squat and shepard's character being forced down bioware's road... that certainly didn't improve ME3's RPG side.

I wouldn't call ME3 a tps/rpg hybrid. It's a shooter with some rpg elements. And there's nothing special about that. Lots of games these days have rpg elements.

Modifié par Robhuzz, 14 janvier 2013 - 10:07 .