18 réponses à ce sujet

[Hihogmass]

First of all, ME1 was not a full RPG, thats what made it so unique and amazing, it was a new and exciting genre. I have read from multiple reviews that "this is the best bioware has ever made" and "the RPG elements are all there, sometimes even more so than ME1" And things like that (can't remeber what review). I would NOT worry about these elements, bioware is advertising the improved combat because it is very much improved! Why would bioware, a company that has made quality RPGs for over a decade start sucking completely now and throw away all the RPG elements in one game?

[SnowHeart1]

I think one of the things going on is that a lot of the people voicing their concerns are being (unfairly) attacked as haters. Expressing a concern is not the same as saying, "OMG, it's going to totally suck." That said, there are some people saying the game will be totally ruined and they're cancelling their pre-orders, and Bioware has completely sold out to a bunch of l33t, pimply teenagers who curse obsenities over Xbox Live and brag about their massive pwnage. That is bunk; I completely agree. Bioware has always (IMO) been one of the best companies with respect to storytelling, and I have no doubt ME2 will be at least as good as ME in that regard, and quite possibly better.

[MrGOH]

The RPG elements that are mentioned in your quotes are all of the character interaction variety. It's awesome that they've been improved. What a lot of us are worrying about is PC skill and ability growth, and PC and party customization. These are RPG elements which apparently have been reduced in ME2.



For me, it's not even about combat, which was pretty lame in ME1. I love the fact that it's more in-depth and that there's no dice rolling for hits and misses. It's not about shooter vs. RPG as far as combat goes. But removing customization options moves ME2 closer to a shooter with choose-your-own-adventure dialogue and story elements. That is, Bioware retains the RPG concept of choice and consequences in its storytelling but not in how it deals with character skills and abilities. It is quite possible to make a deep skill and ability system that allows for customization and growth while simultaneously retaining ME2's much-improved combat system.

[KBGeller]

RPG's are more than storytelling. Resident Evil is not an RPG, yet it has a simple inventory system, intense combat, and the like.

What makes an RPG is the ability to collect stuff from a large number of items, equip your character with those items you can collect, lots of skill to "customize" your character, and free-form explore.

Now, don't get me wrong, I have avoided spoilers and so I cannot and am not making an argument for either side. But from the little things I have read and seen by accident/mistake. It would seem like they have removed some things that generally define what RPG's are. Now, that is not to say that it is going to change the flow or enjoyment of the game.

However, that IS to say the RPG elements seem to have been diminished.

Modifié par KBGeller, 20 janvier 2010 - 02:49 .

[MrGOH]

KBGeller wrote...

RPG's are more than storytelling. Resident Evil is not an RPG, yet it has a simple inventory system, intense combat, and the like.

What makes an RPG is the ability to collect stuff from a large number of items, equip your character with those items you can collect, lots of skill to "customize" your character, and free-form explore.

Now, don't get me wrong, I have avoided spoilers and so I cannot and am not making an argument for either side. But from the little things I have read and seen by accident/mistake. It would seem like they have removed some things that generally define what RPG's are. Now, that is not to say that it is going to change the flow or enjoyment of the game.

However, that IS to say the RPG elements seem to have been diminished.

I think the stuff collecting is less about the stuff and more about providing options to customize your characters. That is, the stuff you get and equip represent customization choices (e.g., do I use weapon X, which provides a damage bonus or weapon Y which has an area of effect attack?). These choices are what define an RPG game, whether they lie in stuff you equip, abilities you train or bonuses you collect from completing quests.

[SnowHeart1]

KBGeller wrote...

RPG's are more than storytelling. Resident Evil is not an RPG, yet it has a simple inventory system, intense combat, and the like.

What makes an RPG is the ability to collect stuff from a large number of items, equip your character with those items you can collect, lots of skill to "customize" your character, and free-form explore....

I was making a similar argument in another thread and attracted a troll, so I gave up making it.  Nuance was apparently not appreciated, nor was respect for differences of opinion.  <_<

Anyway, I don't disagre.  But, you're not going to get people to agree on what the definition of an RPG is.  You are more likely to get people to agree on what are common elements.  If storytelling is one element, and we can all agree that will be good, then great... we can move that to the side and focus on the other elements that traditionally make an RPG.  I think it's perfectly fair and reasonable to have concerns about what has been done with those systems, while also recognizing that the storytelling is likely to remain fabulous or even be better than it was.  In the end, however, we can't really judge until we've seen and played the game for ourselves.  Doesn't make the concerns less valid, but they are speculative until we've actually played the game.

[Hihogmass]

MrGOH wrote...



I think the stuff collecting is less about the stuff and more about providing options to customize your characters. That is, the stuff you get and equip represent customization choices (e.g., do I use weapon X, which provides a damage bonus or weapon Y which has an area of effect attack?). These choices are what define an RPG game, whether they lie in stuff you equip, abilities you train or bonuses you collect from completing quests.

Oh man if only there was an indepth character customization! Oh wait, there is! you can changes all features of your armor and the weapons all have different effects also, so i don't know where your argument is coming from?

[MrGOH]

Hihogmass wrote...

MrGOH wrote...



I think the stuff collecting is less about the stuff and more about providing options to customize your characters. That is, the stuff you get and equip represent customization choices (e.g., do I use weapon X, which provides a damage bonus or weapon Y which has an area of effect attack?). These choices are what define an RPG game, whether they lie in stuff you equip, abilities you train or bonuses you collect from completing quests.

Oh man if only there was an indepth character customization! Oh wait, there is! you can changes all features of your armor and the weapons all have different effects also, so i don't know where your argument is coming from?

You apparently can't customize your party's armor, nor is the ability customization system as deep as in ME1. I do think the armor customization is neat-o, but it's really just a replacement for the old system of getting a bunch of different armors and being ablse to add a couple enhancements to each. The other issue, for me, is that armor and weapon customization in ME2 is open; that is, once you have the tech for a mod, you can always make it, which makes sense. But part of what I like about ability and skill customization systems is that they force me to make strategic decisions that I have to live with. Unlike armor and weapon mods which can be switched out endlessly, once I choose to specialize my PC in a particular skill , I can't go switch it out and specialize in a different skill. This makes my PC feel more real rather than just a collection of geegaws.

Modifié par MrGOH, 20 janvier 2010 - 03:22 .

[Ingrimm22]

The thing is that Singleplayer-RPGs nowadays have to face the competition of MMOs, so if they want to differentiate themselves enough to be successful, they have to rely on what Offline-RPGs do best: Story and Character-Interaction. If you want a loot game then most of the MMOs out there, even the free ones, have much more content than any offline-rpg can ever have.

Especially in ME the loot-aspect never really felt important. The armor-differences where neglectable until the end of the game. The armor and weapon enhancements where even more useless, or at least they felt useless. What Bioware did with ME2 is they got rid of old RPG relics that MMOs do far far better and focused on things that single-player rpgs (especially in the case of bioware) can do better. Offline-Lootgames are dead and that's fine with me, i play mmos for that. In an offline RPG i want story, story, story delivered in a cinematic way and narratively well developed characters, things that no MMO can provide up to this day.

Modifié par Ingrimm22, 20 janvier 2010 - 03:41 .

[MrGOH]

Ingrimm22 wrote...

The thing is that Singleplayer-RPGs nowadays have to face the competition of MMOs, so if they want to differentiate themselves enough to be successful, they have to rely on what Offline-RPGs do best: Story and Character-Interaction. If you want a loot game then most of the MMOs out there, even the free ones, have much more content than any offline-rpg can ever have.

*snip*

Absolutely.

[PwrGetter]

I'm really not worried, the way I see it, is that they've just improved upon aspects of ME1 that were tedious. I love RPG's, but let's be realistic, ME was never a true RPG, in traditional sense - which I'm fine with.

[bluewolv1970]

but didnt they make all the free form collecting in the first game actually have a purpose in mass effect 2 and actually enhance your characters customization, to me that is actually and rpg imrovement that relates to both freem from exploartion and combat customization

Modifié par bluewolv1970, 20 janvier 2010 - 03:53 .

[brunomalta]

PwrGetter wrote...

I'm really not worried, the way I see it, is that they've just improved upon aspects of ME1 that were tedious. I love RPG's, but let's be realistic, ME was never a true RPG, in traditional sense - which I'm fine with.

I agree with you and am myself saying this on several threads around here.

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

When you look at the core components of an RPG, both ME and from what it sounds like ME2 are definitly RPGs. I really don't understand the people that think either of the games isn't a true RPG, because deep down at the core where it is most important they are.

The facts state this. You are playing a role of a character named " Shepherd", you have a backstory and a personality, you go through a story improving your skills and going on adventures. You are able to affect the story through choices you make and some of these choices can have consequences that affect things that you come across later on.

The way I see it, most of the 'naysayers' just don't like the fact the combat system is fairly 'twitch' orientated rather than pressing a button for your character to take a shot and for some sort of 'dice' system to consider if you missed or hit them. So because it isn't something they are used to they claim that the game isn't an RPG, that is wrong, that is just their opinion, granted they are entitled to it but it doesn't mean it is true.

Modifié par Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien, 20 janvier 2010 - 04:08 .

[Seraphael]

KBGeller wrote...

RPG's are more than storytelling. Resident Evil is not an RPG, yet it has a simple inventory system, intense combat, and the like.

What makes an RPG is the ability to collect stuff from a large number of items, equip your character with those items you can collect, lots of skill to "customize" your character, and free-form explore.

Now, don't get me wrong, I have avoided spoilers and so I cannot and am
not making an argument for either side. But from the little things I
have read and seen by accident/mistake. It would seem like they have
removed some things that generally define what RPG's are.

Sounds like an RPG is about playing a free-roaming garbage collector with potential in your view. Let's rather get back to the roots. ROLE. PLAYING. What benefits roleplaying are elements which make the game seem more true to life or plausible, this again facilitates immersion which makes for more enjoyable (role)playing. Shooter combat, meaningful interaction and choice helps in this regard. That you forgot about meaningful interaction and choice in your summation of what an RPG is supposed to be, is very telling indeed.

Both the loot system and the character development system are extremely bloated leftovers from the MMORPG genre. This was to compensate for the lack of meaningful interaction, choice, story and also to attract players for extended periods of time. Clearly ME2 doesn't have to compensate for any of this. The insane amount of loot detracted more than added to ME1 in my view; it was unrealistic and obtrusive. Streamlined character development removes the pitfalls of character design. Having so many levels that you're able to max almost all skills isn't about choice - it's about powergaming, something which is the opposite of roleplaying.

Basically, I wish people would stop worrying about what makes an RPG, and start concentrating on what makes a game good.

Modifié par Seraphael, 20 janvier 2010 - 05:30 .

[Frostbittenjam]

Soooo is Kotor an RPG-RPG then? What makes it more of one then ME or ME2? Is it that it has a boring, dice-based combat system? Because other than that these games have the same elements in common. As far as I'm concerned these sub-genres ppl are coming up with are dumb. A RPG is an RPG. Just because it has (actually fun! ) combat doesn't make it any less of a RPG. Like others have said, an RPG to me has a deep and complex story and inter-character relationships, that you as the player can chose to interact with as you see fit, in addition to being able to design your character as you want. Massive amounts of (for all non-profiteering purposes) useless equipment and painfully designed menus are not what make an RPG. And when I play an RPG, I am role playing my own character. Sure I care about the NPC's and party characters, but not being able to customize what they wear isn't exactly a big deal. And plus, in the context of the story not being able to do this makes sense. Can you honestly see someone trying to tell SuZe to change her outfit?



All Bioware has done with this game is make it more enticing for non-RPG'ers to get interested in. By making the combat more enjoyable they have a chance to snare a bunch of shooter game fans, and potentially retain them as future buyers. From my perspective, I am a huge Star Wars geek and so of course I loved Kotor's story, but every time I have played it I always wished there was more exciting combat, something I actually had control over, rather than just relying on the luck of the roll. ME was like the answer to my prayers, a scifi RPG with actually combat, and now that ME2 has even better combat, well, regardless of others' perceptions of it's un-RPG-ness (?) I know it's going to be AWE-- wait for it -- SOME!

[javierabegazo]

How many RPG threads are there?

[izmirtheastarach]

javierabegazo wrote...

How many RPG threads are there?

42?

[Nozybidaj]

javierabegazo wrote...

How many RPG threads are there?

I was wondering this too, along with all the "hey new interview/video/info" threads repeating the same stuff.  Need some serious moderation up in here.