260 réponses à ce sujet

[anmiro]

spirosz wrote...

Tbh, I thought ME2 was close to perfect, I never felt like I lost control of my Shepard and there was a good amount of auto-dialogue mind you, but it was mostly used in situations where Shepard would start a conversation, like during Thane's recruitment mission and Nassana. Now, I know this isn't the same case for everyone and I understand that, but overall - I found that the interruptions, the the dialogue felt great. I used to save before talking to people, just to see the different outcomes, especially staying neutral with Jack, Shepard and Jack both come out expressing themselves differently, compared to Paragon and Renegade (where he would either sound too "fix-her" (which I wasn't trying to achieve) or too "not me".

I felt that you only need two playthroughs with ME3 to get the full gist, compared to ME1 and 2. Also, renegade Shepard felt a bit... I don't know out-of-place with a lot of the auto-dialogue and my Shepard was a neutral-paragon mindset.... so.

Rambling.

Agreed, ME2 is my fave. The assault on the collector base is the only mission in the trilogy where we actually utilize the entire crew  and get to see Shepard 'truly' in command. I was so dissappointed when I relized ME3 would not have a similar final mission. Instead it was the usual pick two squadmates while everyone else stays at the Command Center and contributes nothing.

[SyK18]

anmiro wrote...

spirosz wrote...

Tbh, I thought ME2 was close to perfect, I never felt like I lost control of my Shepard and there was a good amount of auto-dialogue mind you, but it was mostly used in situations where Shepard would start a conversation, like during Thane's recruitment mission and Nassana. Now, I know this isn't the same case for everyone and I understand that, but overall - I found that the interruptions, the the dialogue felt great. I used to save before talking to people, just to see the different outcomes, especially staying neutral with Jack, Shepard and Jack both come out expressing themselves differently, compared to Paragon and Renegade (where he would either sound too "fix-her" (which I wasn't trying to achieve) or too "not me".

I felt that you only need two playthroughs with ME3 to get the full gist, compared to ME1 and 2. Also, renegade Shepard felt a bit... I don't know out-of-place with a lot of the auto-dialogue and my Shepard was a neutral-paragon mindset.... so.

Rambling.

Agreed, ME2 is my fave. The assault on the collector base is the only mission in the trilogy where we actually utilize the entire crew  and get to see Shepard 'truly' in command. I was so dissappointed when I relized ME3 would not have a similar final mission. Instead it was the usual pick two squadmates while everyone else stays at the Command Center and contributes nothing.

YES YES YES!! They should have added the whole entire squad into one big push on Earth! It would have been epic! I shared the same dissapointment.

[Ykulnu]

Zakuspec089 wrote...

Mass Effect is an RPG we get to make choices, in other games we don;t!!!!!!

The choices in Mass Effect are more akin to visual novels than traditional RPGs. 

[SyK18]

Ykulnu wrote...

Zakuspec089 wrote...

Mass Effect is an RPG we get to make choices, in other games we don;t!!!!!!

The choices in Mass Effect are more akin to visual novels than traditional RPGs. 

I don't know man. In Forza I chose to use a Nissan instead of a Toyota. Is that an RPG?

[Cainhurst Crow]

What ever happened to just playing out the role of a character and seeing their journey as an rpg genre?

Now everything is about how much a game quantitatively has of a singular feature than another game.

[Indy_S]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

What ever happened to just playing out the role of a character and seeing their journey as an rpg genre? 

Effectively, that would make every game featuring a protagonist an RPG.

[SyK18]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

What ever happened to just playing out the role of a character and seeing their journey as an rpg genre?

Now everything is about how much a game quantitatively has of a singular feature than another game.

With that logic.

CoD --> RPG shooter
Alan Wake --> RPG horror
Fire Emblem --> RPG TBS
Alpha Protocol -->RPG RPG

Seriously though, who thought that Alpha had a better character interaction and dialog system than ME. ANd was actually an RPG that is described as a "traditional" RPG

This guy.

[Indy_S]

SyK18 wrote...

Seriously though, who thought that Alpha had a better character interaction and dialog system than ME. ANd was actually an RPG that is described as a "traditional" RPG

This guy.

I love AP. It does seem more like my preferred style of RPG. I'm also a big fan of its reaction to choices.

[Ykulnu]

Indy_S wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

What ever happened to just playing out the role of a character and seeing their journey as an rpg genre? 

Effectively, that would make every game featuring a protagonist an RPG.

"Playing a role" is far more than the sum of just those three words in regards to RPGs. Sure, you assume the role of the protag in every game you play, but that's only one of the qualities that define an RPG. 

RPGs have attributes, stats, abilities, quests, are typically non-linear in dungeon and area design, and SHOULD have a factor of random  chance involved. The point of an RPG video game is to draw inspiration and build upon mechanics and game design established by traditional, tabletop RPGs. It's more than action and choice. It's a numbers game with checks and balances dictated by playstyles and opposition types.

ME3 does not get high mark s in this regard, unfortunately. 

Modifié par Ykulnu, 25 février 2013 - 05:13 .

[FlamingBoy]

having a non-crippled dialogue wheel

[AlanC9]

Ykulnu wrote...
RPGs have attributes, stats, abilities, quests, are typically non-linear in dungeon and area design, and SHOULD have a factor of random  chance involved. The point of an RPG video game is to draw inspiration and build upon mechanics and game design established by traditional, tabletop RPGs. It's more than action and choice. It's a numbers game with checks and balances dictated by playstyles and opposition types.

Nonlinearity is a feature of CRPGs more than P&P RPGs. ME3 's more linear plot structure is much more like a typical P&P campaign than ME1's or ME2's.

[IMNOTCRAZYiminsane]

Everything Steelcan said in this tread made me scream at my laptop in agreement

One thing I want to talk about is Cerberus and how i wanted to at least be in contact with them
I am a Cerberus Fan girl and to see them turn into that and Tim being Space Hitler pissed me off like wtf they were too lazy to make new enemies that they just used Cerberus ME3 didn't have to be 2 different games but i wouldn't mind having the game play out as Shepard bringing the Galaxy Together while choosing between Cerberus and The Alliance 1=Alliance 2=Cerberus 3=both did we really have to have that one group who had to be controlled

I love my Renegade but Jesus every time i watch my Shepard get all "I'm sorry" after Thessia (hate that place, dislike asaris aside from Samara and Aria) If they wanted my Shepard to 'break' then at least have my Renegade get upset and pissed at Tevos. Have a Paragon be all sorry just like you have a choice to punch or speak to Garrel after the Geth dreadnought

Also ME3 is a RPG just not like 1 and 2

[Ykulnu]

AlanC9 wrote...

Ykulnu wrote...
RPGs have attributes, stats, abilities, quests, are typically non-linear in dungeon and area design, and SHOULD have a factor of random  chance involved. The point of an RPG video game is to draw inspiration and build upon mechanics and game design established by traditional, tabletop RPGs. It's more than action and choice. It's a numbers game with checks and balances dictated by playstyles and opposition types.

Nonlinearity is a feature of CRPGs more than P&P RPGs. ME3 's more linear plot structure is much more like a typical P&P campaign than ME1's or ME2's.

I could mention randomly generated dungeons and such, but I see what you're getting at. I'll concede that point, but there is very little else in common between the two.

[GoldenPersona]

If Mass Effect 3 was an RPG...

I'd want to be able to customize my guns first of all. Make it so it has less weight, and pierces armor easier. I'd also like a choice of my class, each with distinct play styles and powers. I'd also want power branches that actually have noticeable changes. Not a fan of "you do 1% more damage!" I'd like to see my powers change as well. Maybe stasis turning into a bubble that keeps freezing enemies that touch it.

Some nice armor customization too, a choice of my armor set making powers cool down faster, even if it means less health. Choosing the colors would be cool too.

Oh wait...this is awkward....

Modifié par GoldenPersona, 25 février 2013 - 05:33 .

[AlanC9]

Ykulnu wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Ykulnu wrote...
RPGs have attributes, stats, abilities, quests, are typically non-linear in dungeon and area design, and SHOULD have a factor of random  chance involved. The point of an RPG video game is to draw inspiration and build upon mechanics and game design established by traditional, tabletop RPGs. It's more than action and choice. It's a numbers game with checks and balances dictated by playstyles and opposition types.

Nonlinearity is a feature of CRPGs more than P&P RPGs. ME3 's more linear plot structure is much more like a typical P&P campaign than ME1's or ME2's.

I could mention randomly generated dungeons and such, but I see what you're getting at. I'll concede that point, but there is very little else in common between the two.

I don't see ME3 as being any worse at this than any other CRPG, myself. Which probably means that you and I don't agree on what's important about P&P RPGs. I suppose we could talk specifics if you think it worthwhile.

[Ykulnu]

AlanC9 wrote...

Ykulnu wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Ykulnu wrote...
RPGs have attributes, stats, abilities, quests, are typically non-linear in dungeon and area design, and SHOULD have a factor of random  chance involved. The point of an RPG video game is to draw inspiration and build upon mechanics and game design established by traditional, tabletop RPGs. It's more than action and choice. It's a numbers game with checks and balances dictated by playstyles and opposition types.

Nonlinearity is a feature of CRPGs more than P&P RPGs. ME3 's more linear plot structure is much more like a typical P&P campaign than ME1's or ME2's.

I could mention randomly generated dungeons and such, but I see what you're getting at. I'll concede that point, but there is very little else in common between the two.

I don't see ME3 as being any worse at this than any other CRPG, myself. Which probably means that you and I don't agree on what's important about P&P RPGs. I suppose we could talk specifics if you think it worthwhile.

I'd love to, if I hadn't had the same type of discussion over and over last March... I'm grateful for it though. It made me realize that we all get different things out of a game. No reason to be haggling over genre when we essentially believe the same thing; it's an RPG. How much of an RPG feel each player gets out of it is all up to that person.

Modifié par Ykulnu, 25 février 2013 - 05:46 .

[chemiclord]

If random chance (especially in loot tables) is a defining feature of RPG's then I NEVER want to play an RPG.

What a terrible mechanic.

Modifié par chemiclord, 25 février 2013 - 06:48 .

[Eterna]

I don't need to pretend.

[StayFrosty05]

chemiclord wrote...

If random chance (especially in loot tables) is a defining feature of RPG's then I NEVER want to play an RPG.

What a terrible mechanic.

Nah...worse yet is random dice roll chance on strikes/hits in electronic RPG's....<_<....explaing why I won't touch Morrowind, but love Oblivion ans Skyrim.

Modifié par StayFrosty05, 25 février 2013 - 06:59 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

Indy_S wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

What ever happened to just playing out the role of a character and seeing their journey as an rpg genre? 

Effectively, that would make every game featuring a protagonist an RPG.

I'm beginning to think that's what happened. Games used to be much simpler, so character focused games that didn't simply drop you into the action, say like how mario drops you into the middle of the game, or sonic, or any atari game.

Back than my definition made sense, but as time went on and technology evolved, so to did games ability to actually tell a compelling story with characters who have real personalities and such.

I concede the points raised by other posters.

[David7204]

The Mass Effect series does character relationships better than any fiction I've read or watched or played. Not any game. Any fiction.

[StayFrosty05]

David7204 wrote...

The Mass Effect series does character relationships better than any fiction I've read or watched or played. Not any game. Any fiction.

In regards to games...'True', if it's not classed an RP....great story to watch, but one you have very little say in....you make decisions in ME3, but you do not drive the personal one on one stories behind the man anymore....relationships are pre-set in ME3.

As for Books, Movies, I have read/seen a great deal better.

Modifié par StayFrosty05, 25 février 2013 - 07:19 .

[Eckswhyzed]

Anyone who says ME3 is just a shooter has clearly never played a straight-up shooter.

As for RPGs, ME3 has some elements of RPGs and doesn't have others. Everyone seems to have their own definition of RPG so I'm not going to bother.

[Not_art_just_plotholes]

David7204 wrote...

The Mass Effect series does character relationships better than any fiction I've read or watched or played. Not any game. Any fiction.

You have some catching up to do child...

That said, you probably feel that way because Mass Effect does an excellent job of making you feel as though you are Commander Shepard and the relationships with the other characters are YOURS, not someone elses. It makes you care more about it, but had the game played out in front of you like a movie I think you would have a different opinion.

[David7204]

There are two choices in games. You can make the relationships with other characters more variable, so that the player character can canonically hate them, or betray them, or kill them. But the price of that is that those characters cannot have an effort on the story, or much of an effect on other characters, or, really, much of an effect on anything. Fallout: New Vegas is a good example of this. You can kill your companions if you don't like them. Or betray them.  But nothing happens. None of your other companions so much as notice. The story continues the same as before. The only thing that changes is their personal quest and ending.

Or you can have characters play a role in the story. But to do that, characters have to have some sort of relationship with the player character, regardless of how the player feels about them.

Developers cannot tell 2 stories, or 4, or 8, or 16, or 32, or 64. They can only tell one. And a story involves characters. That's just the end of it. The story of Mass Effect involves Liara, and Miranda, and EDI, and that's just the end of it.

Modifié par David7204, 25 février 2013 - 07:21 .