86 réponses à ce sujet

[brocodaily]

Dude or Madame(or mademoiselle),

It is perfectly okay to be skeptical about something.  This game however, shouldn't be it.  Bioware has seemingly taken every complaint (or at least the major ones) and tried to fix them.  That if anything is a cause for celebration. 

Now i feel I need to address a blaring misconception:
When did RPG's become solely about leveling/XP/Baldur's Gate/Turn Based/Side Quests/Multi-Party/Skill developing/World Exploration/Final Fantasy/Great Storyline/Mission Based/Choice making/Character Development/Fighting Nefarious bad guys/Leveling Up/Custimizing your character: the way he/she looks, acts, behaves/Bioware/Random Sex scenes/Pushing the Envelope for what a game can be/toying with emotions/LionHead/Level Building/Random ass Side games (quasar, blitzball, Pubgames, Dampé's Challenges)/Endlessly rolling from place to place/Defeating Ridiculous Bosses/Air Ships/Shenmue(enough said)/Hidden Temples/Ocarina Playing/OverWorks(they made Skies of Arcadia-GREAT game)/Health Points/Mana/Codex's/Universe Building/Searching Every Chest/Upgrading your weapons and armor/Shooting things when diplomacy fails/constitution checks/D20's/D12's/D8's/D6's/D4's/percentage DIE(you know someone uses them somewhere)/Shooting creatures of all shapes and sizes with everything from futuristic weaponry based on mass effect fields to Deku Tree fashioned boomerangs(makes no sense to me either)/etc./etc./etc./etc......Breath.

...Do you see where I am going with this?  RPG's span the damn board.  People have been complaining that Mass Effect 2 is going to be a RAWRShooter and be like the Rainman of RPG's.  I just don't understand, partially because Rainman was pretty freakin cool, but also because what is WRONG with taking the elements we all love form an RPG and putting them with the fast paced and entertaining gameplay action of some tight knit shooters? 

And more specifically when did this type of game become NOT an RPG?  To pigeon hole a GENRE into one specific train of thought is like telling a really badass chef to only make Shepards Pie for the rest of his career. I mean sure, he probably is REALLY good at making them, and Shepards Pies are damn delicious pretty much any day of the week. BUT he has the ABILITY to create a whole heck of a lot more.  So why shouldn't he experiment and expound?

I love the fact that games are evolving and changing, experimenting and discovering new avenues of expanding games into the powerhouse entertainment medium they are today and will continue to be in the future.  It seems some want stagnation with their preferred genres.  Which i find repugnant.  i mean sure, some genres shouldn't be crossed (Mass Effect and Rock Band anyone?) but a little experimentation never hurt anything.  It is how we have created the world we live in!  Everything from iPods to Atom Bombs.(not proud of that last one mind you).

My overall point is this: feel free to judge a game once you have it and can play it, but not before, based solely on speculation and advertising.  Look how awesome Fable II looked in the ads and through the developers, and we all know how that one turned out.  (extreme let down.  not a bad game, just below most peoples expectations).

Wait until January 26th(or 29th...sorry Europe) to bring the hammer of misguided justice down atop the heads of Bioware. 

Last time I checked this group made some pretty damn good games,(see REALLY GOOD games) and we need to have a little faith that they can deliver on the goods.

So those bashing this game and calling it ever whosit whatsit they can think of need to either expand your definition of what games can be, or try to keep it to yourself until you actual PLAY the game.  Then say whatever you will because you will be perfectly entitled to your opinion.

That...that makes sense to me.

What about you?

[brunomalta]

Nope...it is not. Since the first one it was an ACTION game with some Role Play parts. What set it appart were the choices and i believe that this will be even truer on ME 2. Inventory, side quest and all else failed on ME 1. You did not had control of your characters stats, only his "special" talents. All this, for me, made it an Action game and from the looks of things, this is more evident now than never. I have nothing against it but don´t fool yourself. This is not an RPG as Dragon Age is.

Modifié par brunomalta, 20 janvier 2010 - 01:55 .

[Aradace]

I dont know if you meant to do it or not but....Nice pun there with the "Shepard's Pie" comment. /gives cookie

[brunomalta]

Sorry...double post.

Modifié par brunomalta, 20 janvier 2010 - 01:55 .

[Aradace]

brunomalta wrote...

Nope...it is not. Since the first one it was an ACTION game with some Role Play parts. What set it appart were the choices and i believe that this will be even truer on ME 2. Inventory, side quest and all else failed on ME 1. You did not had control of your characters stats, only his "special" talents. All this, for me, made it an Action game and from the looks of things, this is more evident now than never. I have nothing against it but don´t fool yourself. This is not an RPG and Dragon Age is.

Actually, this game fits into the same "genre" that Borderlands does. FPSRPG as I like to call them lol.  But seriously though.  It's alot like Borderlands in that regard, just because you dont have control over your "attributes" like str stam int and dex like your normal "cookie cutter" rpg, doesnt make it any less of an RPG....fact...

[brunomalta]

Aradace wrote...

brunomalta wrote...

Nope...it is not. Since the first one it was an ACTION game with some Role Play parts. What set it appart were the choices and i believe that this will be even truer on ME 2. Inventory, side quest and all else failed on ME 1. You did not had control of your characters stats, only his "special" talents. All this, for me, made it an Action game and from the looks of things, this is more evident now than never. I have nothing against it but don´t fool yourself. This is not an RPG and Dragon Age is.

Actually, this game fits into the same "genre" that Borderlands does. FPSRPG as I like to call them lol.  But seriously though.  It's alot like Borderlands in that regard, just because you dont have control over your "attributes" like str stam int and dex like your normal "cookie cutter" rpg, doesnt make it any less of an RPG....fact...

Yes....actually, if thinking about it, this is more Role Play than other RPGs, like the JRPGs in the sense that you actually have some tought choices and you can be and act like you want to.

Modifié par brunomalta, 20 janvier 2010 - 01:59 .

[Terror_K]

We'll see in just over a week. I'm still dubious. I don't think there's anything they can do that'll make me understand and accept them removing Decryption as a tech-based skill for example.

[brocodaily]

lol, no brunomalta I totally didn't mean to do that. Was it because I love Shepards Pie or was it a freudian slip? hmm.



But yes, feel free to discuss the hell out of this, because I am adamant that a GENRE encompasses much more than people seem to give it credit for.

[Terror_K]

brocodaily wrote...

But yes, feel free to discuss the hell out of this, because I am adamant that a GENRE encompasses much more than people seem to give it credit for.

Yes and no. For example, there are quite a few RPG's that don't have several of the story-driven game attributes many have come to associate with RPG's.

Then there's the fact that many people are too hung up on the "Roleplaying" part of the name and think of every game where you "play a role" as being an RPG, which is absolutely false.

Thirdly, there's the fact that an RPG needs certain attributes to be an RPG; a statistical progression system being key.

Finally, eventually one crosses the line and stops being an RPG and instead becomes "anther genre with RPG" elements (e.g. The 3D GTA titles, Dawn of War II, etc).

[Valmy]

Is it a RPG? Close enough for me.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Terror_K wrote...

We'll see in just over a week. I'm still dubious. I don't think there's anything they can do that'll make me understand and accept them removing Decryption as a tech-based skill for example.

Because it was pointless. I mean, I'm wondering why they didn't just remove hacking altogether.

I think I'll enjoy the added party flexibility anyhow. I'm getting the feeling that to get everyone's loyalty up we'll need to change our party composition a regularly, so it might do well to not feel like you're chained to having a tech user in your party at all times (I tend to go tech heavy myself, but it's nice to have that option open).

[Yai-Kai]

brocodaily I couldn't agree more. This might not be as deep as D&D, not even as deep as DA:O (which is ALOT more simple then D&D from what I've seen) but the choices do shape the story and your character, and you can pretty much develop the character the way you want him/her to.
Ok you don't have full control over ALL stats, but do we HAVE to all the time? There's plenty of games doing that already.
I have full faith in BW, well when it comes to ME2 anyway, RtO is another story for another board.

In the end it's up to you if you buy it, new, used, wait for a pricedrop, or don't play it at all.
And, if you like the universe but don't like ME2, it's not like ME1 is going to run away

EDIT: Just thought of this, Fallout 3 is titled as an RPG, shouldn't that be called FPS RPG? Oblivion is titled RPG, isn't that First Person Action RPG? Diablo is titled RPG, but isn't that Hack 'n Slash RPG?
What I'm trying to say is, you can go on and on (and on, etc), games differ, genres are just a guideline, but there are no rules that NEED to be followed in every single game in that genre

Modifié par Yai-Kai, 20 janvier 2010 - 02:16 .

[brunomalta]

Terror_K wrote...

brocodaily wrote...

But yes, feel free to discuss the hell out of this, because I am adamant that a GENRE encompasses much more than people seem to give it credit for.

Yes and no. For example, there are quite a few RPG's that don't have several of the story-driven game attributes many have come to associate with RPG's.

Then there's the fact that many people are too hung up on the "Roleplaying" part of the name and think of every game where you "play a role" as being an RPG, which is absolutely false.

Thirdly, there's the fact that an RPG needs certain attributes to be an RPG; a statistical progression system being key.

Finally, eventually one crosses the line and stops being an RPG and instead becomes "anther genre with RPG" elements (e.g. The 3D GTA titles, Dawn of War II, etc).

Maybe you meant this by my comment about the role play part. But, RPG was created to be a game to be play on a table with some frinds were you played the part of another character. This is the root of the game. I played (D&D, etc) and so, for me, this is the most important part on an RPG and what makes it being an RPG or not.
Stats and all were created to give you some rules on combat and other actions. It is like playing Cops and Robbers were there are no rules and so, when a shootout occurs, no one know who hit who. So, the stats and inventory are not that important as long as you are role playing and have some fun.

[Terror_K]

I hope not. That'd be another kick in the crotch to a standard RPG mechanic for party-based RPG's: having to create a squad that compliments your main character.



I know some people with go "Waaaah! That's too restrictive!" and the like, but that's what good RPG's are about. I'm sick of this namby pamby "let's make it accessible to 5 year olds" mentality.

[MrGOH]

Shooter RPG, although from what I've seen the PC and party customization RPG aspects have been simplified a ton. NOt sure If I'm a big fan of that.



I personally hated the decryption skill (and the atrocious mini-game) requirement to unlock things. But the limited number of skills and the much-rumored lack of armor for companions worry me. To me, RPG's are more than choose-your-own-adventure shooters, which is the direction Bioware seems to be taking ME.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Terror_K wrote...

I hope not. That'd be another kick in the crotch to a standard RPG mechanic for party-based RPG's: having to create a squad that compliments your main character.

I know some people with go "Waaaah! That's too restrictive!" and the like, but that's what good RPG's are about. I'm sick of this namby pamby "let's make it accessible to 5 year olds" mentality.

There wasn't a single reason not to bring 3 soldiers in ME1. They all pop immunity and your party becomes invincible. class composition was never a priority in that game, as there is no "Tank/Healer/DPS" paradigm you see in all the MMOs nowadays.

Also, Baldur's Gate and Dragon Age both became greatly easier games the more mages you brought. Those games are definitely not balanced around a balanced party either, despite being "tactical RPGs"

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 20 janvier 2010 - 02:18 .

[JudgeQwerty]

I play ME because I'm fascinated with the universe and characters, but few games ever actually catch my attention in the action department. Sadly, ME1 was not such a game, so I tend to set the combat settings to 'easy' when I can and then just stroll up to the enemies to blast them apart. For me, ME is strictly an RPG.

[dirtypaulie]

I agree it's still an RPG even more so an RPG than borderlands cuz imho Borderlands is far from an RPG but more like a shooter witha lvl'ing system. Mass Effect is a story most of us are continuing from part 1. Yea they upgraded the combat. Some don't like that idea, oh well too late. As for myself I'm 1 that loves that Idea of upgraded combat. I have played mass effect hours upon hours, obtaining all of the acheivements possible. I have about 12 end game saves ready for import to ME2 with my lowest lvl Characters being a 46 Commando Soldier & 52 Medic Sentinel. You know what the combat in ME was mediocre! It still proved to be a great game. With the upgraded combat in ME2 I can see myself playing it even more than I did part 1. People are gonna still be complaining about the changes made even after the game comes out, smh, oh well again its too late.

How often does Bioware make a great shooter type of game? Some of you are giving them less credit than they deserve. They made a very fun 3ps on the dreamcast back in the day MDK 2, any of you remember that? They are not a company that makes primarily shooting type games. They are proud of themselves right now for doing something different & doing it well. So am I along with a gang of forumites that agree with me. They were pushing the bar for the genre when ME1 came out they are setting the standard for a totally new type of game. Like i heard them say in that sci vs fi, they are taking the most loved elements from RPG & shooter & finding a perfect medium. All I say is thank you Bioware I appreciate it

Modifié par dirtypaulie, 20 janvier 2010 - 02:28 .

[brunomalta]

MrGOH wrote...

Shooter RPG, although from what I've seen the PC and party customization RPG aspects have been simplified a ton. NOt sure If I'm a big fan of that.

I personally hated the decryption skill (and the atrocious mini-game) requirement to unlock things. But the limited number of skills and the much-rumored lack of armor for companions worry me. To me, RPG's are more than choose-your-own-adventure shooters, which is the direction Bioware seems to be taking ME.

That´s my only worry too.

[Yai-Kai]

MrGOH wrote...

Shooter RPG, although from what I've seen the PC and party customization RPG aspects have been simplified a ton. NOt sure If I'm a big fan of that.

I personally hated the decryption skill (and the atrocious mini-game) requirement to unlock things. But the limited number of skills and the much-rumored lack of armor for companions worry me. To me, RPG's are more than choose-your-own-adventure shooters, which is the direction Bioware seems to be taking ME.

Then maybe ME2 won't be the game for you then. They have a bigger audience to reach
Besides, it's bioware, I'm sure it will be accassible to a younger audience, but I'm sure there's tons of stuff to make it more complicated if you look further then the surface.

[Terror_K]

brunomalta wrote...

Maybe you meant this by my comment about the role play part. But, RPG was created to be a game to be play on a table with some frinds were you played the part of another character. This is the root of the game. I played (D&D, etc) and so, for me, this is the most important part on an RPG and what makes it being an RPG or not.
Stats and all were created to give you some rules on combat and other actions. It is like playing Cops and Robbers were there are no rules and so, when a shootout occurs, no one know who hit who. So, the stats and inventory are not that important as long as you are role playing and have some fun.

Jeez... this is as bad as the old forum...<_<

No, the stats are rules are there to give the system a set of guidelines and boundaries and to track your character's progression as they gain experience. There's more to it than that, but that's the gist of it. Without that, you may be "roleplaying in a game" but you're not playing a "Roleplaying Game" at all. Every Pen and Paper RPG out there has some ruleset and system governed by a statistical factors. They're not all as involved as AD&D, but it's there.

If you throw that away any story-driven game suddenly gets labeled as an RPG, which is false. Monkey Island is not an RPG. Gears of War is not an RPG. Halo is not an RPG. GTA IV is not an RPG. Fahrenheit (Indigo Prophesy for the Yanks) is not an RPG. Heavy Rain is not an RPG. Space Ace is not an RPG. The list goes on.

This is a silly problem to have, since it seems to be a misconception that only appears on gaming forums and only in the last 5-6 years. Before then everybody knew what defined an RPG. The game industry and media still do thankfully, as they never mislabel graphic adventures and other story-driven games with no statistical ruleset as RPG's. It confuses and disturbs me that the BioWare boards are so filled with people who have this misconception these days.

[Kohaku]

JudgeQwerty wrote...

I play ME because I'm fascinated with the universe and characters, but few games ever actually catch my attention in the action department. Sadly, ME1 was not such a game, so I tend to set the combat settings to 'easy' when I can and then just stroll up to the enemies to blast them apart. For me, ME is strictly an RPG.

This. What I didn't like about ME was the battle system. I don't like crouching and ducking. All of those things are foreign to me. I don't play First/Third Person Shooters because I can't play them. I can't aim to save my life with a thumbstick. This one will be the same way.

[brunomalta]

Terror_K wrote...

brunomalta wrote...

Maybe you meant this by my comment about the role play part. But, RPG was created to be a game to be play on a table with some frinds were you played the part of another character. This is the root of the game. I played (D&D, etc) and so, for me, this is the most important part on an RPG and what makes it being an RPG or not.
Stats and all were created to give you some rules on combat and other actions. It is like playing Cops and Robbers were there are no rules and so, when a shootout occurs, no one know who hit who. So, the stats and inventory are not that important as long as you are role playing and have some fun.

Jeez... this is as bad as the old forum...<_<

No, the stats are rules are there to give the system a set of guidelines and boundaries and to track your character's progression as they gain experience. There's more to it than that, but that's the gist of it. Without that, you may be "roleplaying in a game" but you're not playing a "Roleplaying Game" at all. Every Pen and Paper RPG out there has some ruleset and system governed by a statistical factors. They're not all as involved as AD&D, but it's there.

If you throw that away any story-driven game suddenly gets labeled as an RPG, which is false. Monkey Island is not an RPG. Gears of War is not an RPG. Halo is not an RPG. GTA IV is not an RPG. Fahrenheit (Indigo Prophesy for the Yanks) is not an RPG. Heavy Rain is not an RPG. Space Ace is not an RPG. The list goes on.

This is a silly problem to have, since it seems to be a misconception that only appears on gaming forums and only in the last 5-6 years. Before then everybody knew what defined an RPG. The game industry and media still do thankfully, as they never mislabel graphic adventures and other story-driven games with no statistical ruleset as RPG's. It confuses and disturbs me that the BioWare boards are so filled with people who have this misconception these days.

Dont´t worry  I read your post and saw that i was wrong, i agree with you.

[DigitalMaster37]

Honestly, people have their own opinions on what an RPG is. Here are some facts (instead of giving you a bunch of my opinions) An RPG is definitely a game where you can customize and create a character, go through a very deep story, change the course of the game with decisions and most importantly: ROLE PLAY!

Everything else is just opinions and preferences. So is Mass Effect an RPG? Why yes, yes it is.
Is ME a RPG as some gamers would like it to be? Why no, no it is not.
So at the end of the day it is left to people's interpretation and understanding of what a roleplaying game is. But with all things considered, ME IS an RPG.

Nowadays games are blurring the lines as it relates to genre. So we will continue to get more of a combination of genres within newer games.

Modifié par Deltaboy37-1, 20 janvier 2010 - 02:26 .

[brunomalta]

dirtypaulie wrote...

I agree it's still an RPG even more so an RPG than borderlands cuz imho Borderlands is far from an RPG but more like a shooter witha lvl'ing system. Mass Effect is a story most of us are continuing from part 1. Yea they upgraded the combat. Some don't like that idea, oh well too late. As for myself I'm 1 that loves that Idea of upgraded combat. I have played mass effect hours upon hours, obtaining all of the acheivements possible. I have about 12 end game saves ready for import to ME2 with my lowest lvl Characters being a 46 Commando Soldier & 52 Medic Sentinel. You know what the combat in ME was mediocre! It still proved to be a great game. With the upgraded combat in ME2 I can see myself playing it even more than I did part 1. People are gonna still be complaining about the changes made even after the game comes out, smh, oh well again its too late.

How often does Bioware make a great shooter type of game? Some of you are giving them less credit than they deserve. They made a very fun 3ps on the dreamcast back in the day MDK 1 & 2, any of you remember that? They are not a company that makes primarily shooting type games. They are proud of themselves right now for doing something different & doing it well. So am I along with a gang of forumites that agree with me. They were pushing the bar for the genre when ME1 came out they are setting the standard for a totally new type of game. Like i heard them say in that sci vs fi, they are taking the most loved elements from RPG & shooter & finding a perfect medium. All I say is thank you Bioware I appreciate it

Dude...MDK was from Shiny...not Bioware. MDK 2 was from Bioware.

Modifié par brunomalta, 20 janvier 2010 - 02:24 .