809 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

Melca36 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
@Plaintiff:
If this topic comes up often, it's because it's a problem for many.

That's not what I meant.

You seem to be genuinely unaware, so let me warn you right now: prepare for this thread to turn into an orgy of frothing hatred aimed squarely at Jennifer Hepler.

I'm rather used to being the target of frothing fanatics ever since my sojourn on the ME3 story forum. I was unaware that Hepler said that when I made the topic, but I say kudos to her, and everyone who doesn't recognize this as a valid issue because they want to impose their gaming preferences on others can go to hell. How the hell does it impact others' gaming preferences if there is an option to skip combat encounters?

@all:
I repeat: Jennifer Hepler was right. Deal with it.

Some of us want to play an actual game and NOT just pay for a semi interactive content.  We dont want everything handed to us easily although I do agree the combat in DA2 was mostly ridiculous.

What about the word "option" didn't you understand? Nobody wants to deprive anyone else of combat. It's like skipping dialogue. I can do it, and if I do, I miss out on content I consider far more interesting that combat, but I don't need to and I rarely do. Even so, I'm still glad that the option exists because after the nth replay, there is some dialogue I really don't need to hear yet another time.

It is legitimate to apply a similar mechanism to combat, unless you think that combat is more essential to an RPG than character interaction. In that case, I disagree.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 05 juillet 2013 - 06:55 .

[Twisted Path]

Combat should be a fun and integral part of a game (that has combat in it.) If it's a boring chore (and for me it was in DA2,) something has gone very very wrong.

[Ieldra]

Realmzmaster wrote...
Maybe it would be better to have an auto combat or auto resolve button? The idea being that the program compares the strength of each party with the enemy and automatically resolves the combat.

I've played games with autoresolve. Very useful, but in the old games you could lose a fight or achieve a pyrrhic victory and continue as long as one character was alive, and you'd have to pay for resurrections and suchlike. These days, it would be more like an auto-win button since you only lose if your PC dies and then it's game over. The most you can lose while still continuing is a few injury kits.

Having said that, yes, it would work nicely if adapted to the style of modern games.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 05 juillet 2013 - 07:05 .

[TexasToast712]

Xilizhra wrote...

It's always interesting how perceptions differ, as I actually liked DA2's combat noticeably more than DAO's. But it'll probably be changed some in DAI; it'll be interesting to see how.

I enjoyed DA2 combat more as well. I hope a good balance for DAI would be pretty much like DA2 but with less flashy anime-esque fighting moves. The dagger Rogue is pretty ridiculous.

[Neon Rising Winter]

People have wanted to skip the combat in RPGs pretty much since they started churning them out. And strategy games too come to that - see the old auto resolve button mentioned above. Those things would usually give you horrible results favouring the computer unless you were vastly overpowered, but you'd still press it to dodge another round with the combat system. I think this is why I don't very often have a problem with combat in recent games, it's so much better than it used to be.

However, that does mean I sympathise with people who want a way to, shall we say streamline their combat experience, so they're not stuck plinking away all evening and get on with the other core RPG business of seeing the sights, following the story, talking the ear off NPCs and collecting shiny things.

I can understand a developer coming and saying, no, can't do that, technically not feasible, no resources, something along those lines. I can't understand people saying the game shouldn't offer the option as if it was some horrible failing to let people who dislike the combat dodge it in favour of the aspects they do enjoy.

Modifié par Narrow Margin, 05 juillet 2013 - 07:06 .

[Boycott Bioware]

There should be no option, we all have to going through boring cut scenes, dialogues, romances... so we all must also going through boring, annoying, time consuming combat isn't it?

It just a matter of personal taste, some like combat more, some like drama more, to provide an option to choose to skip is ridiculous. It is like providing an option to the student to skip your class in the school just because some student say your class is boring

Or like giving an option to football players to skip the whole game and just playing the penalty shot, in the end it is about goal or not goal isn't it? The game is boring, why not skip it and just playing penalty shot instead?

[Rawgrim]

xkg wrote...

Brexan wrote...

xkg wrote...
Oh please ... please don't start "what is an RPG" debate.
These games are classified by major gaming sites as an RPG games so lets just stick with the more common classification and not your own.

Then lets use your definination.

Role - Playing - Game

rather than

Role - Watching - Game

In these types of fantasy RPGs you pick up weapons or a spellbook, the characters role is to battle enemies and overcome the evils of the fantasy world. If that role doesn't appeal, there's not much that can comepensate. Just like if you don't like farming you wouldn't pick up a copy of Harvest Moon and be upset that you have to farm.

Yeah another fine example of RPG == combat.

Or you can PLAY THE ROLE of the farmer (Harvest Moon) - There is a story, there are dialogues, there is a character progression - yeah looks like an RPG to me, one without a combat.

Or you can make your character and interact with other people, join various social activities, build your house, progress your character - talking about the Second Life here - looks like an RPG too.

In these types of simulation RPGs you make your character and his role is to live a life. Simple as that.

And like I already said, those are offically classified as an RPG games so please don't try to redefine the genre.

Brexan wrote...

While I have no problem with an optional combat skipping features, as long as it doesn't affect my game play or take time away from adding other more mainstream features, I have to echo what others have said - playing a video game just to watch the custscenes really seems odd. It would be like McDonalds spending time creating a Hamburger for people who don't like Burgers

You mean playing point and click adventure (like the old Sierra, Lucasart etc) games has no sense ? Because there is no combat, only the story.

By your logic Super Mario Bros is an rpg too, since you play the role of a plumber.

What gaming sites classifies a game as in of no consequence. Even Diablo is classifed as an rpg, and that game has only combat. No dialogue whatsoever.

[Realmzmaster]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...
Maybe it would be better to have an auto combat or auto resolve button? The idea being that the program compares the strength of each party with the enemy and automatically resolves the combat.

I've played games with autoresolve. Very useful, but in the old games you could lose a fight or achieve a pyrrhic victory and continue as long as one character was alive, and you'd have to pay for resurrections and suchlike. These days, it would be more like an auto-win button since you only lose if your PC dies and then it's game over. The most you can lose while still continuing is a few injury kits.

Having said that, yes, it would work nicely if adapted to the style of modern games.

So basically what is wanted is that the PC never dies in game. There is never a party wipe and the party gets all the loot and benefits with no downside. Basically an interactive movie.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 05 juillet 2013 - 07:39 .

[xkg]

Qistina wrote...

There should be no option, we all have to going through boring cut scenes, dialogues, romances... so we all must also going through boring, annoying, time consuming combat isn't it?

It just a matter of personal taste, some like combat more, some like drama more, to provide an option to choose to skip is ridiculous. It is like providing an option to the student to skip your class in the school just because some student say your class is boring

Or like giving an option to football players to skip the whole game and just playing the penalty shot, in the end it is about goal or not goal isn't it? The game is boring, why not skip it and just playing penalty shot instead?

Is this some kind of sarcasm or ? Because in every Bioware game that I have played, it is possible to skip dialogues and cutscenes. And the romances are optional too - you have to initiate them first, so what is your point ?




Oh, and @Rawgrim
These are life simulation RPGs, whether you like it or not.
And tbh, for me, simulation RPGs (and especially life simulation) always gave me the best RPG experience, much better that any other dungeon crawler or JRPG (ala Final Fantasy etc).
I just don't see how grinding endless mobs and fighting one battle after another is "Role-Playing-Your-Character".

But enough about that. This is my last post on the "what is an RPG" subject.

[Realmzmaster]

xkg wrote...

Qistina wrote...

There should be no option, we all have to going through boring cut scenes, dialogues, romances... so we all must also going through boring, annoying, time consuming combat isn't it?

It just a matter of personal taste, some like combat more, some like drama more, to provide an option to choose to skip is ridiculous. It is like providing an option to the student to skip your class in the school just because some student say your class is boring

Or like giving an option to football players to skip the whole game and just playing the penalty shot, in the end it is about goal or not goal isn't it? The game is boring, why not skip it and just playing penalty shot instead?

Is this some kind of sarcasm or ? Because in every Bioware game that I have played, it is possible to skip dialogues and cutscenes. And the romances are optional too - you have to initiate them first, so what is your point ?




Oh, and @Rawgrim
These are life simulation RPGs, whether you like it or not.
And tbh, for me, simulation RPGs (and especially life simulation) always gave me the best RPG experience, much better that any other dungeon crawler or JRPG (ala Final Fantasy etc).
I just don't see how grinding endless mobs and fighting one battle after another is "Role-Playing-Your-Character".

But enough about that. This is my last post on the "what is an RPG" subject.

Actually The Sims and Second Life are not catagorized as role playing games. They are catagorized as a subgenre called life simulations  (as you pointed out) within the genre simulation video games (which include SimCity). 

Role playing games are given a different definition from simulation video games because simulation video games simulate the actual experience of say flying a aircraft like Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Role playing games can simulate life but by in large have a science fiction or fantasy element that is not usually found in life simulations.

Role playing games draw their gameplay from traditional p n p role playing games like D & D, RuneQuest, Traveller etc.

Games like Harvest Moon cross genres as do other games. The defintions become less clear. The point is that when gamers think of crpgs they are not thinking about Harvest Moon, The Sims or Second Life.

Edited to clean up a misspelling

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 06 juillet 2013 - 01:10 .

[Gotholhorakh]

Ieldra2 wrote...

I was severely burned by DA2's combat. Endless hordes of trash enemies always appearing in the same type of wave all around me, combat encounters without any meaning or purpose, to say nothing about the groan-worthy animations and cheap special effects. It's about as much fun as chopping onions. I never want to have that again in a game.

Usually, whenever I get bored with the combat in other games - as can happen even with the best of them after enough playthroughs - I set the difficulty to Casual and combat is over reasonably fast. Only, not in DA2. Most enemies don't die any slower on Normal than on Casual, their number is drawing things out beyond my patience, and there is always the next wave, and the next, and the next. No matter that I can sit back and let my team handle the fight almost without doing anything myself, setting the difficulty to Casual in DA2 does not reduce the time wasted in combat significantly (and in DA2 it was a waste of time 90% of the time, as opposed to, say, ME3).

So here's what I'd like to see: an option to reduce the number of waves in a combat encounter to one, or any other way to get combat over with real fast. I don't care if it costs me xp.

In principle this kind of automatically resolved combat is something an RPG is well equipped to do well - I'd be interested to see how such a thing was implemented - something like the Total War games?

It's not something I'd be likely to enjoy or use at all, have to level with you there, unless the rest of the game got a lot more involved - and just flipping through the cutscenes of a game could be over very quickly indeed - but I am curious about how many people would like this.

I'd be interested to see which RPGs people preferred, who wanted this feature.

[JamieCOTC]

Mass Effect 3 did include a narrative mode (or story mode) which made the combat much easier. Something like that would be a good compromise. Yeah, I hated DA2's combat too.

[HiroVoid]

It's not like they ever try to fuse combat with the actual story anyway, so I don't see why not?

[Fredward]

If it's just an option sure. And what does Hepler have to do with any of this?

[GithCheater]

Seth_Holloway wrote...

I think Bioware accomplished this pretty well in ME3:

Narative mode = Pro-Story + Quicker Combat
Action mode = Intense combat + Less Story
Classic RPG mode = Full combat + Full Story.

I dont see how this would inconvience or dissapoint anyone. It allows the player the freedom to choose what aspects of the game to focus on.

My personal preference would lean towards RPG for my first few playthroughs, then Narative for minor story elements I may have missed.

I'd likley never play 'Action' mode.

To my way of thinking removing story decsions almost removes the point of playing a plot driven RPG, But that is only my opinion, if people enjoy the combat more than the narrative thats awesome, and they should be able to play their game the way they want to.

I'd pretty much support any feature that allows players to customise their game to improve their own experience, so long as that improvement didnt restrict the freedoms or enjoyment of others.

I too would do Classic RPG mode for at least one play-through, and then use Narrative for minor story elements and for companion interactions and romances I may have missed.

[Dr. Doctor]

I want some kind of enemy morale system. If I'm facing bandits and kill one with zero effort, or unleash blood magic, set them on fire, etc. they should run for their lives not throw more bandits at us like they're the Crazy 88's.

[GithCheater]

kumquats wrote...

I vote yes.
I did play ME3 on Insanity, because I like a challange....[lol]
And I used the narrator mode to record some very rare dialogues.

I hope they offer something like that in DA:I aswell, where you can just skip a lot of combat, to test out all the different dialogue options.

I mean I played Kotor at least 12 times, to really see everything that game has to offer, but I simply don't have the time for that anymore, so a narrator mode, would be awesome.

I vote yes as well for the same reasons.

[Maria Caliban]

When I decided to check out the different endings for ME 3, I set it to Story difficulty. I was a bit shocked at how my character cut through foes like they were butter.

[GithCheater]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Melca36 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
@Plaintiff:
If this topic comes up often, it's because it's a problem for many.

That's not what I meant.

You seem to be genuinely unaware, so let me warn you right now: prepare for this thread to turn into an orgy of frothing hatred aimed squarely at Jennifer Hepler.

I'm rather used to being the target of frothing fanatics ever since my sojourn on the ME3 story forum. I was unaware that Hepler said that when I made the topic, but I say kudos to her, and everyone who doesn't recognize this as a valid issue because they want to impose their gaming preferences on others can go to hell. How the hell does it impact others' gaming preferences if there is an option to skip combat encounters?

@all:
I repeat: Jennifer Hepler was right. Deal with it.

Some of us want to play an actual game and NOT just pay for a semi interactive content.  We dont want everything handed to us easily although I do agree the combat in DA2 was mostly ridiculous.

What about the word "option" didn't you understand? Nobody wants to deprive anyone else of combat. It's like skipping dialogue. I can do it, and if I do, I miss out on content I consider far more interesting that combat, but I don't need to and I rarely do. Even so, I'm still glad that the option exists because after the nth replay, there is some dialogue I really don't need to hear yet another time.

It is legitimate to apply a similar mechanism to combat, unless you think that combat is more essential to an RPG than character interaction. In that case, I disagree.

Evidently the option would "dumb down" the game for "real" fans.  However, when one asks for examples of "dumbing down" the question is conveniently ignored.

[HiroVoid]

GithCheater wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Melca36 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
@Plaintiff:
If this topic comes up often, it's because it's a problem for many.

That's not what I meant.

You seem to be genuinely unaware, so let me warn you right now: prepare for this thread to turn into an orgy of frothing hatred aimed squarely at Jennifer Hepler.

I'm rather used to being the target of frothing fanatics ever since my sojourn on the ME3 story forum. I was unaware that Hepler said that when I made the topic, but I say kudos to her, and everyone who doesn't recognize this as a valid issue because they want to impose their gaming preferences on others can go to hell. How the hell does it impact others' gaming preferences if there is an option to skip combat encounters?

@all:
I repeat: Jennifer Hepler was right. Deal with it.

Some of us want to play an actual game and NOT just pay for a semi interactive content.  We dont want everything handed to us easily although I do agree the combat in DA2 was mostly ridiculous.

What about the word "option" didn't you understand? Nobody wants to deprive anyone else of combat. It's like skipping dialogue. I can do it, and if I do, I miss out on content I consider far more interesting that combat, but I don't need to and I rarely do. Even so, I'm still glad that the option exists because after the nth replay, there is some dialogue I really don't need to hear yet another time.

It is legitimate to apply a similar mechanism to combat, unless you think that combat is more essential to an RPG than character interaction. In that case, I disagree.

Evidently the option would "dumb down" the game for "real" fans.  However, when one asks for examples of "dumbing down" the question is conveniently ignored.

Having the option means no more events like where you fight Ser Cauthrien and can win or lose to lead to different scenarios......but that's the sole case of that I can figure out, so like I said in my previous post...nothing's really lost.  On the opposite scenario with an 'action' mode, I worry about it since that came about in ME3 the same time a lot of auto-dialogue even if you aren't playing in action mode.

[GithCheater]

Qistina wrote...

There should be no option, we all have to going through boring cut scenes, dialogues, romances... so we all must also going through boring, annoying, time consuming combat isn't it?

It just a matter of personal taste, some like combat more, some like drama more, to provide an option to choose to skip is ridiculous. It is like providing an option to the student to skip your class in the school just because some student say your class is boring

Or like giving an option to football players to skip the whole game and just playing the penalty shot, in the end it is about goal or not goal isn't it? The game is boring, why not skip it and just playing penalty shot instead?

I agree.  The TV News should not be forbidden to show sports highlight reels, and newspapers should not be allowed to exist because they post summaries and never show the whole story.

[Ieldra]

Gotholhorakh wrote...
I'd be interested to see which RPGs people preferred, who wanted this feature.

Perhaps it is no surprise that my favorite RPG of all time is Planescape:Torment, followed by Arcanum. Honorable mention for Fallout 1+2 and New Vegas. Basically, the more an RPG routinely offers mechanisms to resolve situations which use other character traits than combat-related ones, the better I like it. I think non-combat skills should eclipse combat skills in importance, and I find it much more interesting to develop my characters's skills in things like diplomacy and science and attributes like intelligence and charisma and get meaningful results from them than to always fight stuff.  

The most satisfying situations in DA2 were those when I got a star option because I talked to someone in another situation and got some piece of information that turned out useful

Modifié par Ieldra2, 05 juillet 2013 - 09:19 .

[xkg]

Realmzmaster wrote...


Actually The Sims and Second Life are not catagorized as role playing games. They are catagorized as a subgenre called life simulations  (as you pointed out) within the genre simulation video games (which include SimCity, F. 

The point is that when gamers think of crpgs they are not thinking about Harvest Moon, The Sims or Second Life.

Categorized by whom ? You ?
Lets have a look at few popular gaming sites:

Gamefaqs: Genre:Role-Playing > Massively Multiplayer Online > Modern
IGN: Genre: Persistent Online RPG
Gamespot: Role-Playing
Gamespy: Genre: RPG

Or just go to the official site and see how many RPGs communtites do they have.
http://secondlife.co...ations/roleplay
There is much more true ROLE PLAYING going there than in any other MMORPGS. RPing possibilities in WoW for example, is like a joke comparing to SL.

I know I've said that I'am done with this subjeect but damn ... I feel like talking to a wall here.
For the last time - dont force your private definitions on others.

Realmzmaster wrote...
The point is that when gamers think of crpgs they are not thinking about Harvest Moon, The Sims or Second Life.

Then it looks like after nearly 30 years of gaming I am not a gamer. *shrugs*

[MisanthropePrime]

What people who want to skip combat are basically asking for is a Japanese Visual Novel. That's fine and dandy, but it's not a RPG, and, furthermore, taking a game of one genre and forcing it into another is just going to emphasize the flaws of both.