So a polished turd is what you want?Seival wrote...
I want NME to be a heavily story-driven RPG which uses environment design similar to K:SF, has less interactive dialogue options than ME3, and has the same level of visual quality as K:SF.
Yeah plus that crappy respirator from the poorly designed HGH commando.AresKeith wrote...
His current avatar hardly looks Helghast and more German ****
Modifié par General TSAR, 08 janvier 2014 - 12:19 .
I... don't... no, seriously... I... urm...Seival wrote...
I want NME to be a heavily story-driven RPG which uses environment design similar to K:SF, has less interactive dialogue options than ME3, and has the same level of visual quality as K:SF.
Modifié par TheRealJayDee, 08 janvier 2014 - 01:48 .
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Of course. That's the new kid on the block making him all hot an bothered just because it looks good. Of course, his ideas in regards to RPGs would never happen, because it would come back to bite anyone because of what people expect from Mass Effect as a RPG. He's basically been saying, "I want Mass Effect to be turned into a linear action experience." Of course, for some weird reason, he wants to keep dialogue options in the game, which would be stupid. That's like putting dialogue options in The Last of Us when you know Joel won't change what he says because there's only one option to pick. That's just wasting the players time with unnecessary mechanics.Mr.House wrote...
Sounds like Sevial just wants ME to become like that crappy new Killzone game.
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
And I want to see what BW does to dig themselves up again.
Modifié par ruggly, 08 janvier 2014 - 03:26 .
Cyonan wrote...
Seival wrote...
Foshizzlin wrote...
I don't like it when "RPGs" try to give you the illusion of freedom. I wish we'd eventually get an open-world, story-driven single-player RPG, truly open-world.
Anything in a game is just an illusion and have limits. Some of game illusions are so stunning that you start thinking they are not illusions at all. The most recent example of this are K:SF dynamic backgrounds and amazing level of local details. Personally, I prefer to see something like this in most modern RPGs. Truly open worlds actually break the perfect illusion and great immersion level for me, because they are vast and not well detailed in each and every place where you can go. You start to recognize the same rocks, bridges, trees, houses, roads etc. You start to see reusage of 10 times reused assets, and their low detail level becomes really annoying.
Skyrim no longer has low detail when you're running about 20+ graphical mods on an overpowered PC like I am =P
Optimization is terrible for hardware requirements, but it looks pretty damn nice.
Although if you want a RPG game that is a true open world with full freedom, you're pretty much going to be playing D&D rather than any video game that is going to be limited by the nature of current technology.
ruggly wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
And I want to see what BW does to dig themselves up again.
What a sight that could be.
Anyways, there are plenty of linear action shooters out there. Mass Effect doesn't need to be one.
Guest_EntropicAngel_*
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
I want to see the game as Seival dreams it could be. Actually, I want to see the reaction of what could be.
And I want to see what BW does to dig themselves up again.
dreamgazer wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
I want to see the game as Seival dreams it could be. Actually, I want to see the reaction of what could be.
And I want to see what BW does to dig themselves up again.
Why?
dreamgazer wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
I want to see the game as Seival dreams it could be. Actually, I want to see the reaction of what could be.
And I want to see what BW does to dig themselves up again.
Why?
Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 08 janvier 2014 - 05:13 .
CrustyBot wrote...
Although on a positive note for Seival, I think we've answered the long debated "what is an RPG?" question.
So, what is an RPG?
A game with the most modern lighting effects and highest res ground textures.
EntropicAngel wrote...
The problem, here, Seival, is that a lot of people don't agree with your definition of what roleplaying is--and thus, what an RPG is.
You have no evidence to prove your definition is correct.
And they have none to prove theirs is correct, either.
So it's simply a stalemate. People can talk about what they consider RPGs, of course, and why they consider something an RPG the other person does not, but there isn't any formal definition of RPG that supports what you're saying.
CynicalShep wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
I want to see the game as Seival dreams it could be. Actually, I want to see the reaction of what could be.
And I want to see what BW does to dig themselves up again.
Why?
Chaos is entertaining
dreamgazer wrote...
CynicalShep wrote...
dreamgazer wrote...
MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...
I want to see the game as Seival dreams it could be. Actually, I want to see the reaction of what could be.
And I want to see what BW does to dig themselves up again.
Why?
Chaos is entertaining
I'd rather have a decent game.
Fast Jimmy wrote...
EntropicAngel wrote...
The problem, here, Seival, is that a lot of people don't agree with your definition of what roleplaying is--and thus, what an RPG is.
You have no evidence to prove your definition is correct.
And they have none to prove theirs is correct, either.
So it's simply a stalemate. People can talk about what they consider RPGs, of course, and why they consider something an RPG the other person does not, but there isn't any formal definition of RPG that supports what you're saying.
His definition says that the "allowing Role Playing" and "being a Game" aspects of an RPG are not only not key to being an RPG, but are actually detrimental to it.
I'd say, just by default, his definition should be viewed with more skepticism.
CynicalShep wrote...
Both sound fun
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Pretty much. If only someone could beat it into his head that he doesn't have to play a specific genre. It's perfectly okay to feel something is too overwhelming, annoying, time-consuming, whatever. Then you just do the sensible thing and leave that type of game alone. What you shouldn't do (something developers seem to have a tendency to accomodate) is ask for the essence of what makes that game as complex as it is to be destroyed to fit your taste of what a good game is. In this case, simplifying dialogue to the point of turning it into a more linear story experience. Especially not using a criteria as fickle as "How 'new' does this game look?" First Seival wanted games to follow in Beyond: Two Souls footsteps on some BS basis of well known actors and mo-cap providing a better game. Now he wants RPGs to follow in Killzone's footsteps because it looks great. I'd ask him to leave these pointless shenanigans alone but these threads are entertaining.Ravensword wrote...
Fast Jimmy wrote...
EntropicAngel wrote...
The problem, here, Seival, is that a lot of people don't agree with your definition of what roleplaying is--and thus, what an RPG is.
You have no evidence to prove your definition is correct.
And they have none to prove theirs is correct, either.
So it's simply a stalemate. People can talk about what they consider RPGs, of course, and why they consider something an RPG the other person does not, but there isn't any formal definition of RPG that supports what you're saying.
His definition says that the "allowing Role Playing" and "being a Game" aspects of an RPG are not only not key to being an RPG, but are actually detrimental to it.
I'd say, just by default, his definition should be viewed with more skepticism.
I think he doesn't like playing RPGs /c he gets overwhelmed by all the things you can do, so he simply dismisses the aspects of an RPG that make the game and RPG and prefers having his corridor shooters, w/ little to no dialogue options, anorexic customization, and limited skill trees.
Modifié par CrustyBot, 08 janvier 2014 - 06:57 .
J. Reezy wrote...
Pretty much. If only someone could beat it into his head that he doesn't have to play a specific genre. It's perfectly okay to feel something is too overwhelming, annoying, time-consuming, whatever. Then you just do the sensible thing and leave that type of game alone. What you shouldn't do (something developers seem to have a tendency to accomodate) is ask for the essence of what makes that game as complex as it is to be destroyed to fit your taste of what a good game is. In this case, simplifying dialogue to the point of turning it into a more linear story experience. Especially not using a criteria as fickle as "How 'new' does this game look?" First Seival wanted games to follow in Beyond: Two Souls footsteps on some BS basis of well known actors and mo-cap providing a better game. Now he wants RPGs to follow in Killzone's footsteps because it looks great. I'd ask him to leave these pointless shenanigans alone but these threads are entertaining.Ravensword wrote...
Fast Jimmy wrote...
EntropicAngel wrote...
The problem, here, Seival, is that a lot of people don't agree with your definition of what roleplaying is--and thus, what an RPG is.
You have no evidence to prove your definition is correct.
And they have none to prove theirs is correct, either.
So it's simply a stalemate. People can talk about what they consider RPGs, of course, and why they consider something an RPG the other person does not, but there isn't any formal definition of RPG that supports what you're saying.
His definition says that the "allowing Role Playing" and "being a Game" aspects of an RPG are not only not key to being an RPG, but are actually detrimental to it.
I'd say, just by default, his definition should be viewed with more skepticism.
I think he doesn't like playing RPGs /c he gets overwhelmed by all the things you can do, so he simply dismisses the aspects of an RPG that make the game and RPG and prefers having his corridor shooters, w/ little to no dialogue options, anorexic customization, and limited skill trees.
Retour en haut