416 réponses à ce sujet

[Kalfear]

todahouse21 wrote...

So what's best for the game? Last I checked pre-orders were doing fine, the game is receiving good reviews and bioware is going to make a ton of money.

What is the "obvious fact" you're talking about?

Obvious fact is people are worried about these changes. A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE!

Sure ME2 sales doing good, thats off ME1 rep and the vids (mostly) they released for ME2 that have been nothing short of amazing!

All that doesnt change the OBVIOUS FACT that if game is to shooter based (no matter how strong story is) ME3 sales will suffer with out changes!

See I have a brain, I already know there is going to be a huge outcry about the lack of character customization (not armor color but skill and stats of character) available for the Soldier class. Its basically Halo in ME2 from all reports.

Ammo, we will have to see how that plays out but if people start dieing because they out of ammo, all hell is going to break loss here because the MAJORITY of Biowares fan base is NOT shooter fans and typical shooter fans will not buy Mass Effect as its got to much story. How do I know this? they said it already about ME1.

List of things go on and on, those are OBVIOUS FACTS. Only people that dont seem to see them are the few shooter fans trying to out vocalize the majority right now, like they did to get these changes made in the first place. Trust me, if even 20% of Mass Effects real fan based showed up here after Mass Effect 1, these shooter changes would never of happened. Sad thing is, ME1 was so good, it didnt occur to many they needed to post anything beyond "great game". I certainly didnt forsee this overhaul and dumbing down of game mechanics coming after ME1. Figured they fix the Mako stuff, fix the side missions, and everything else would stay pretty much the same as IT WASNT BROKEN!

Bioware forgot the golden rule regarding mechanics, YOU DONT FIX WHAT AINT BROKEN!

But like all the level headed people/posters (the non shooter ones) Im willing to wait for game release for final judgement! Bioware deserves that much. But if the mechanics play out like they sound like, the posts you see now (already a majority I might add) are like 0.00001% of the posts that will be coming upset about changes.

That ALSO is a OBVIOUS FACT

[Kalfear]

Kalfear wrote...

todahouse21 wrote...

So what's best for the game? Last I checked pre-orders were doing fine, the game is receiving good reviews and bioware is going to make a ton of money.

What is the "obvious fact" you're talking about?

Obvious fact is people are worried about these changes. A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE!

Sure ME2 sales doing good, thats off ME1 rep and the vids (mostly) they released for ME2 that have been nothing short of amazing!

All that doesnt change the OBVIOUS FACT that if game is to shooter based (no matter how strong story is) ME3 sales will suffer with out changes!

See I have a brain (hense why I dont play full out shooters), I already know there is going to be a huge outcry about the lack of character customization (not armor color but skill and stats of character) available for the Soldier class. Its basically Halo in ME2 from all reports.

Ammo, we will have to see how that plays out but if people start dieing because they out of ammo, all hell is going to break loose here because the MAJORITY of Biowares fan base is NOT shooter fans and typical shooter fans will not buy Mass Effect as its got to much story. How do I know this? they said it already about ME1.

List of things go on and on, those are OBVIOUS FACTS. Only people that dont seem to see them are the few shooter fans trying to out vocalize the majority right now, like they did to get these changes made in the first place. Trust me, if even 20% of Mass Effects real fan based showed up here after Mass Effect 1, these shooter changes would never of happened. Sad thing is, ME1 was so good, it didnt occur to many they needed to post anything beyond "great game". I certainly didnt forsee this overhaul and dumbing down of game mechanics coming after ME1. Figured they fix the Mako stuff, fix the side missions, and everything else would stay pretty much the same as IT WASNT BROKEN!

Bioware forgot the golden rule regarding mechanics, YOU DONT FIX WHAT AINT BROKEN!

But like all the level headed people/posters (the non shooter ones) Im willing to wait for game release for final judgement! Bioware deserves that much. But if the mechanics play out like they sound like, the posts you see now (already a majority I might add) are like 0.00001% of the posts that will be coming upset about changes.

That ALSO is a OBVIOUS FACT

[SurfaceBeneath]

Kalfear wrote...
Obvious fact is people are worried about these changes. A MAJORITY OF PEOPLE!

Assuming that the voices on these forums represent a statistic analogue to the player base is dumb. Most people are not concerned about the changes in the game. Go to any neutral website forum (Gamespot, IGN, Penny-Arcade, etc etc) and the overwhelming concensus is that the changes in ME2 are absolutely AWESOME and are fixing many of the flawed mechanics from the first game.

Someone with a complaint about how the game is turning out is far more likely to come here and voice their opinion than those that are satisfied about how the game is turning out.

[Memengwa]

Is there a reason you quotted yourself, Kalfear?

[SurfaceBeneath]

Kalfear wrote...

Bioware forgot the golden rule regarding mechanics, [b]YOU DONT FIX WHAT AINT BROKEN!

Mass Effect 1 wasn't broken?



Hate to break it to you, but the combat was mediocre, the exploration boring, the level up system so forgettable sometimes I leveled up several times without realizing it, the inventory was an absolute travesty, and the squaddies were half cardboard and the other half potentially-cool-but-way-underdeveloped.

You want to talk about a minority opinion bud. It's yours.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Memengwa wrote...

Is there a reason you quotted yourself, Kalfear?

It's a good thing he did. It made the double take I did after I finished reading the idiocy he wrote much easier.

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 21 janvier 2010 - 09:56 .

[Terror_K]

Yeah, but most "gamers" these days are Shooter Fanatics. The most popular games these days are the Halos, the Gears of Wars and the Call of Duty's... of course they're going to think ME2 looks great when the the great majority are into that genre of game.

[MrBiggens]

im just wondering what the 'rpg purists' consider Morrowind, Oblivion, and Fallout 3? those 3 games are so heavy on the rpg elements, they're like almost pure RPG. but fun fact: they are all played 100% of the time in FPS. if some1 says Oblivion is a FPS, they're just a ******. like seriously. more shooting doesnt mean less role playing.



lol these nubs have literally no clue what they're talkin about. ME2 will b greatest game. ME3 will top it with an even better greatest game.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Terror_K wrote...

Yeah, but most "gamers" these days are Shooter Fanatics. The most popular games these days are the Halos, the Gears of Wars and the Call of Duty's... of course they're going to think ME2 looks great when the the great majority are into that genre of game.

So are people (like me) who's favorite 2 games are Baldur's Gate 2 and Planescape:Torment. Don't generalize that just because the shooter elements are far and away better that all RPG fans are going to immediately conclude that this is a game for shooter fans.

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 21 janvier 2010 - 10:12 .

[Terror_K]

I love how RPG veterans who have been playing cRPG's since the SSI AD&D games and before are being called "nubs" here.



As far as those Bethesda games you speak of go, while the combat in Oblivion was a bit of a joke and kind of backwards (along with much of the RPG stats system) there's still the fact that all of them had stats one had to pump into the appropriate skill in order to be competent with the weapon. Sure, it was all done in real-time and involved either hacking and slashing or (if you ignored VATS) shooting at an enemy using a standard first-person or third person shooting mechanic, but if one didn't level-up their appropriate skills then they would surely fail later on in game. ME2 has no such system and only relies on one's skill to hit an enemy and damage them. They all also had a base stats system (e.g. S.P.E.C.I.A.L. in Fallout 3) that Mass Effect (both games) lacks entirely which influences several abilities. All these titles are far more in-depth RPG-wise than Mass Effect is.

[jsachun]

todahouse21 wrote...

Why is it that there is seemingly a crowd out there that feel that the game is somehow lessened because it doesn't specifically meet the specifications to make it a pure RPG?

 Call me crazy but as long as its fun, the can call the genre Bob and I wouldn't care.

It obviously doesn't have anything to do with challenge, since its been stated that this game was specifically made to be harder than the original. It's not the actual role playing as Shepard is pretty much define by your decisions. It's not the exploration. 

Is it the lack of grind? Of random encounters? Of prepubescent teens and effeminate heroes saving the world?

What is it?

Well if you are a big fan of RPG in genral without bias to gamestudios or specific games it could be disapointing.

I'll name an example. Dawn of War 2 was a mix of genre between a RPG & a RTS. I was disappointed at the fact that 1. It involved no real strategy to defeat the enemies, 2. Could not choose other races to play campaigns.

I was happy that I could develop characters & pick armor & weapons.

But from a RTS lover point of view, It felt like it was a big waste of money.

Modifié par jsachun, 21 janvier 2010 - 10:20 .

[MrBiggens]

terror, u missed my point. im saying that Bethesda made games that are very in depth 'classic' rpg elements. etc, skill points, lvl'ing up. yet the whole gameplay was entirely FPS. you all want to rag on ME2 for saying its 'too much fps' when those 3 amazingly epic games showed otherwise. just because you dont have 1000 skill points to put into different skills doesnt mean its less of an rpg lol. like seriously

[Memengwa]

My significant other is a shooter fan (he also likes diablo), but he'll never play ME (believe me, I tried).



On the other hand he saw me playing it, and said it looks like a shooter, so now he's trying to make me play his type of games. He also plays Borderlands. He found Deus Ex2 interesting, but he didn't realised it had factions in it untill it was too late (nobody trusted him in the game). He says I'll like Deus Ex2, and I never played it. (i.e we never play each other's games).



So, from what I seeen, a pure-fps fan is NOT going to play ME, unless (s)he is interested in branching out.

[KainrycKarr]

Vaeliorin wrote...

Eragondragonrider wrote...
I a person that has designed and played rpgs for 25 years, I think why most purest are saying ME2 is not a real rpg is because it doesn't have the wait command menu. FFIII set the bar for purest out there and most people want RPGs to be like it because it was such a great for its time.

RPG Purists don't think JRPGs are RPGs.

A lot of purest can not get past the idea that RPGs are evolving constantly to get more people into them. I think having a game that it more live action then waiting to chose what you want to do draws you more into the game and story.

When you remove the role-playing, you no longer have an RPG.  ME has removed the role-playing, therefore it's not an RPG.  That doesn't mean it's a bad game.  I rather enjoyed ME1, but I would put it in the genre of shooter with RPG elements, not into the RPG genre (there are very, very few games that make it into that genre anymore.  Pretty sure DA was the only mainstream game that fit the genre in 2009.)

Uhh.....what?

[Terror_K]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Yeah, but most "gamers" these days are Shooter Fanatics. The most popular games these days are the Halos, the Gears of Wars and the Call of Duty's... of course they're going to think ME2 looks great when the the great majority are into that genre of game.

So are people (like me) who's favorite 2 games are Baldur's Gate 2 and Planescape:Torment. Don't generalize that just because the shooter elements are far and away better that all RPG fans are going to immediately conclude that this is a game for shooter fans.

And my favourite game of all time is Unreal Tournament. A shooter. And yet I'm complaining. What does that tell you?

Things are never absolute. Not all RPG fans are going to be disappointed, but one can't ignore the fact that the Shooter is the far more popular genre these days. I said "Shooter Fanatics" on purpose rather than "Shooter Fans" or anything that general. The "gamer" public out there these days on the generic message boards are I imagine far more likely to be big shooter fans than big RPG fans. There will be some who like both. It's just becoming harder and harder for the RPG fans (or Purists if you'd prefer) to ignore a factor that the original ME1 had that ME2 doesn't: the ability to put the combat aside. One of the things BioWare were (once) proud of with ME1 I remember reading was that their established fanbase didn't have to be shooter fans to play ME1, even though it had shooter elements. That is no longer the case.

[SurfaceBeneath]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

SurfaceBeneath did you skip over my post? Yes, the exploration did suck, but with that said, Mass Effect was close to a perfect game.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Many FPS fans played Mass Effect since they watched the trailer they
saw guns and said "ooooh, exploshuns FTW". When they went through the
gameplay which was so easy for me to settle into for the fact it didn't
FEEL like an FPS, they complained and b****** until they got their way
at the RPG fan's expense. It's not enough they have countless games
catered to their tastes, they have to harm an RPG fan's experience.

FPS fans were complaining about the combat, but all RPG purists I've spoken to
didn't find anything wrong with it. As I've said, not being a shooter kind of guy, I was able to ease into the fights very comfortably. If the FPS fans could have just been content with the story and the simplicity of combat, we wouldn't be discussing this on Bioware's foums in the first place. The gameplay in the first was only broke to FPS fans, RPG fans were perfectly fine with it since we tend to focus much more on the plot. Mass Effect was close to a perfect game. The fact that it relied so heavily on plot is why RPG fans appreciate it so much. But FPS fanboys
had to **** it up for us. How many games do us RPG fans get in 10 years like Mass Effect or Heavy Rain? Not many. However FPS fans have COUNTLESS games that cater to their tastes released every single year. That's not enough though is it? You couldn't just let us have our game untouched. You had to ***** and whine that since it had guns, it NEEDED to play like a FPS.

It really was not anywhere close to a perfect game. It had several very flawed aspects to it that were made up by being absolutely stellar in other areas. But in my pantheon of Bioware games, I'd put it about on par with Jade Empire and WAY below Baldur's Gate 2 and slightly below Dragon Age.

And no, the combat in ME1 was very boring. I certainly wouldn't call myself an FPS fanboy for a moment (I enjoy some FPSes, but generally do not play most FPSes that come out) and I got tired of it about 5 hours in to ME1. Again, go to most neutral websites and you will get told this repeatedly. And don't come back with "well most people who play games are FPSers so yadda yadda yadda" because that is the most ass retarded statement I've ever heard. It tells me that you think people that enjoy FPS games are 1.) dumber than RPG fans and 2.) that what you're saying is correct in the first place (it's not).

[FutureBoy81]

Is it fair to say Mass effect is creating its own Genre ?

[KainrycKarr]

Terror_K wrote...

Yeah, but most "gamers" these days are Shooter Fanatics. The most popular games these days are the Halos, the Gears of Wars and the Call of Duty's... of course they're going to think ME2 looks great when the the great majority are into that genre of game.

Actually, I hate shooters. In fact CoD 4 and 4-2 are the only pure shooters I enjoy, but I love Mass Effect and am very much into Mass Effect 2.

Why? Because it gives me the fast action of a shooter with the personalization, customization, depth, and story of an RPG.

[KainrycKarr]

FutureBoy81 wrote...

Is it fair to say Mass effect is creating its own Genre ?

Yes, it is. It's neither a shooter, nor an RPG. It's something new.

[Memengwa]

MrBiggens wrote...

terror, u missed my point. im saying that Bethesda made games that are very in depth 'classic' rpg elements. etc, skill points, lvl'ing up. yet the whole gameplay was entirely FPS. you all want to rag on ME2 for saying its 'too much fps' when those 3 amazingly epic games showed otherwise. just because you dont have 1000 skill points to put into different skills doesnt mean its less of an rpg lol. like seriously

You mis the fact that most ppl who enjoy BioWare games don't usually find Bethesda type of games enjoyable. And vice-versa. Two very very different styles of play.

[MrBiggens]

Terror_K wrote...

And my favourite game of all time is Unreal Tournament. A shooter. And yet I'm complaining. What does that tell you?

lol thats like saying 'well i date/dated a black girl, so im obviously not a racist'. just cuz Gladiator is my favorite movie of all time doesn't mean i like all roman-esque movies.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Terror_K wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Yeah, but most "gamers" these days are Shooter Fanatics. The most popular games these days are the Halos, the Gears of Wars and the Call of Duty's... of course they're going to think ME2 looks great when the the great majority are into that genre of game.

So are people (like me) who's favorite 2 games are Baldur's Gate 2 and Planescape:Torment. Don't generalize that just because the shooter elements are far and away better that all RPG fans are going to immediately conclude that this is a game for shooter fans.

And my favourite game of all time is Unreal Tournament. A shooter. And yet I'm complaining. What does that tell you?

Nothing. Unreal Tournament was a good game. I played it and enjoyed it too.

There will be some who like both. It's just becoming harder and harder for the RPG fans (or Purists if you'd prefer) to ignore a factor that the original ME1 had that ME2 doesn't: the ability to put the combat aside. One of the things BioWare were (once) proud of with ME1 I remember reading was that their established fanbase didn't have to be shooter fans to play ME1, even though it had shooter elements. That is no longer the case.

You could put aside combat in ME1? Really? As I recall, about 60-70% of the game was spent in combat. But you know, maybe I'm just confused since I haven't played the game since last week.

You're delusional if you think ME1 wasn't a shooter as much as it was an RPG. Absolutely delusional. And that part of it was lackluster.