116 réponses à ce sujet

[Vazgen]

I see this often, ME2 and ME3 are not RPGs. Can someone give a list of features that make a game "true RPG"?

[Revan Reborn]

I see this often, ME2 and ME3 are not RPGs. Can someone give a list of features that make a game "true RPG"?

That's simple. A roleplaying game is defined by you being able to embody a character, personalize it, and see it truly progress and evolve overtime in the experience. With ME2 and ME3, most of the depth is limited to the story, companions, and our choices to make Shepard either a Paragon or a Renegade. Common RPG elements are classes, skill trees, weapon and armor progression, exploration, crafting, looting, inventory, lore/codex, storytelling, companions, housing, leveling, combat, etc.

 

Some of these systems still persist in ME2/3, but they have been largely stripped or are barely relevant. Most of what you will be doing is either scanning planets, avoiding reapers, doing a main quest, a loyalty mission, or the occasional N7 mission. That coupled with running around main hubs every now and then to talk to the occasional NPC or a companion and that's essentially ME2/3 in a nutshell. The focus in ME2/3 was placed on the gameplay, specifically the shooting aspect, and it has driven the game forward ever since with the exception of story.

 

Just compare ME2/3 to CoD/Gears/Halo. How much do they actually have in common? It's actually quite surprising how much BioWare allowed the FPS genre to influence Mass Effect and its entire makeup. At this point, I think BioWare has a solid grasp on how to make a shooter and they need to bring back a focus towards actually building an RPG. There is a lot more depth that could be added to the game with some of these features either being added or revamped. It would greatly broaden the appeal of the game as well as providing that much needed depth and sense of achievement that players are looking for.

[Vazgen]

An RPG game for me is one where I can create my character and shape him/her with accordance to my preferences. Gameplay elements like exploration, inventory, looting etc. are minor for me and I don't consider them as defining characteristics for an RPG game, because they don't affect my experience in shaping the character. I was able to shape three quite different personalities in each game of the trilogy, so I consider all those games RPG games. 

Whatever had a connection to my character's development was made very well in every game, dialogue options, character interactions, loyalty missions, choices - all affected my character's personality in some way. 

What game is less RPG for me? It's actually a tie between ME1 and ME3. ME1, because of Shepard saying things I never wanted him to say and saying those things in all three choices on the dialogue wheel. ME3, because of the removal of middle option which I use quite often. However, as I say, I still consider all three games RPGs.

An example of a somewhat similar game that I don't consider an RPG is Spec Ops: The Line. There are choices in that game (and those choices have consequences), there are also multiple endings based on your choices. However, your character and his personality are fixed, you can't play as someone different. 

 

Regarding character leveling, ME3 does the best job in the entire trilogy. You can max up same skills on two characters and end up with different playstyles. It's not the case neither for ME1 nor for ME2. 

 

In the end, I don't really care what the game is called. If I'm going to have as much fun with ME:Next as with the trilogy I'll get it without any second thoughts about what genre it is. 

[SNascimento]

That being said, they are bad RPGs overall.

I think this is as nonsensical as saying a fish is a bad swimmer therefore it's a worse animal. 

ME2 and ME3 are what they are and not having a feature that some people think they should have is in no way a flaw. What I think Bioware understood well across the series is that there are certain traditional RPG system that don't fit the kind of game they wanted. Inventory is one of those, it's just a waste of time. The needless comparison of stats and this is and that. 

Mass Effect 3 improved ME2 systems without going back to ME1 ideas, which don't fit an action RPG like Mass Effect.

[Lee T]

I liked ME1 brands, I wish they had expanded upon it to give use the weapons as a setting tool. The various weapons brand could be a way to show how each species design weapons. This could also open thoe possibilities of more varied look. The inventory and customisation menu were a mess though, I wish Bioware could find a guy good at doing UI, to this day this is still one of their weaknesses.

I didn't like ME2 system at all. not much to save here except maybe the research concept to find new stuff through tech rather than on looting your opponents.

ME3's workbench was interesting but the stroke of genius was the online order. In ME1 going from the Normandy bay to a Citadel Store required LOADING to the main deck LOADING to the citadel LOADING to Citadel Security LOADING to the promenade and as much LOADING going back... The taxi offer from control when you docked also saved some LOADING time, they really should remember that and implement it in the next game.

[StealthGamer92]

Mass Effect 3 improved ME2 systems without going back to ME1 ideas, which don't fit an action RPG like Mass Effect.

But you are failing to see ME never was(to me at least) an action RPG until after people complained about ME1. They made one game with a certain theme, then bassically made an entirely new game out of the same universe and lore. It was ME but it was also not ME at all. The first game showed you the dream the team had but the complainers made them give up on that dream. If I was on the ME1 team then saw the criticism i would have either made 2 an evolution of 1 trying to improve the points ME1 got wrong or if I was told we have to make ME2 the way it is I would've quit not only working on ME2 but left Bioware for another developer.

[Cknarf]

Taking inventory in ME1 is tedious as s***.

 

I did like how you could change upgrades in the middle of a fight, though.

[SNascimento]

But you are failing to see ME never was(to me at least) an action RPG until after people complained about ME1. They made one game with a certain theme, then bassically made an entirely new game out of the same universe and lore. It was ME but it was also not ME at all. The first game showed you the dream the team had but the complainers made them give up on that dream. If I was on the ME1 team then saw the criticism i would have either made 2 an evolution of 1 trying to improve the points ME1 got wrong or if I was told we have to make ME2 the way it is I would've quit not only working on ME2 but left Bioware for another developer.

But you see, ME1 doesn't fulfill any vision, at least not in gameplay. ME1 gameplay is simply not functional, I'd argue it's plain broken. Clearly Bioware was trying to find its way in a brand new territory for them, and it shows. Not only in the final product, but how it changed in the development as we can see by earlier trailers.

What you're saying is widely speculative at best and wrong at worst. 

[StealthGamer92]

But you see, ME1 doesn't fulfill any vision, at least not in gameplay. ME1 gameplay is simply not functional, I'd argue it's plain broken. Clearly Bioware was trying to find its way in a brand new territory for them, and it shows. Not only in the final product, but how it changed in the development as we can see by earlier trailers.

What you're saying is widely speculative at best and wrong at worst. 

We simply disagree. I think the main reason why is to me ME1 is more than a story combat and missions, it is a universe alive and explorable like none before. I think of this series like I do Splinter Cell. I think they both lost thier identity in hopes of attracting CoD type players. Thiey succeded if ME3 MP is anything to judge by. I will not assume you fall under this category.

 

Yes I know.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Who cares if the games fit into whatever definition of 'RPG'?

 

It's an arbitrary distinction.

[DanishGambit]

But you see, ME1 doesn't fulfill any vision, at least not in gameplay. ME1 gameplay is simply not functional, I'd argue it's plain broken. Clearly Bioware was trying to find its way in a brand new territory for them, and it shows. Not only in the final product, but how it changed in the development as we can see by earlier trailers.

What you're saying is widely speculative at best and wrong at worst. 

This is all really sensational. Mass Effect uses combination of shooter and rpg elements to make battles strategically difficult as opposed to the average corridor shooter in which you press "F" to win. And the game isn't broken by any sense of the word. The controls and inventory were clunky but calling the game broken is horribly biased and simply incorrect.

[Revan Reborn]

I think this is as nonsensical as saying a fish is a bad swimmer therefore it's a worse animal. 

ME2 and ME3 are what they are and not having a feature that some people think they should have is in no way a flaw. What I think Bioware understood well across the series is that there are certain traditional RPG system that don't fit the kind of game they wanted. Inventory is one of those, it's just a waste of time. The needless comparison of stats and this is and that. 

Mass Effect 3 improved ME2 systems without going back to ME1 ideas, which don't fit an action RPG like Mass Effect.

Don't take my word for it. BioWare even admits to scrapping a lot of the RPG elements in favor of a shooter experience. They admittedly did not know how to make a shooter and thus removed a lot of the RPG factors in order to make it more approachable and more appealing.

 

Also, I feel I should note that ME3 didn't deviate from ME2 largely because of time. BioWare only had two years to develop the game, of which was a much shorter development window than ME1 and ME2. With NME they will have a lot more time, and we already know exploration and the Mako is returning. I will not be surprised if we see a return of the inventory system as well.

[SNascimento]

This is all really sensational. Mass Effect uses combination of shooter and rpg elements to make battles strategically difficult as opposed to the average corridor shooter in which you press "F" to win. And the game isn't broken by any sense of the word. The controls and inventory were clunky but calling the game broken is horribly biased and simply incorrect.

Broken might be pushing it, but not much. I can't see how ME1 makes battles "strategically dificult". As I said, there was hardly any room for tatics in ME1. Enemies didn't have a sensible behavior, some just rushed at you. There was no difference between shooting a wall or a enemy. Many powers used by enemies were unavoidable, which resulted in a battle of patience than any sort of strategy. Talking about patience, one word: immunity. It's quite incredible how ME1's combat is terrible. And believe me, I do try to understand how people can say it's better than ME2 or ME3, but it's hard.

ME2's combat compared to ME1 was a quantum leap. And neither it nor ME3 had a "press F to win" attitude. 

 

[SNascimento]

Don't take my word for it. BioWare even admits to scrapping a lot of the RPG elements in favor of a shooter experience. They admittedly did not know how to make a shooter and thus removed a lot of the RPG factors in order to make it more approachable and more appealing.

I'm not saying ME2 and ME3 had less traditional RPG elements than ME1, I'm saying it's utterly irrelevant when you judge the final product. Saying ME2 is a bad RPG make as much sense to me as saying Gears of War is a bad RTS, or that Super Mario Galaxy isn't scary enough. To be fair, it's understandable considering it's a Bioware game, but it's a failure to understand the game. 
 

 

Also, I feel I should note that ME3 didn't deviate from ME2 largely because of time. BioWare only had two years to develop the game, of which was a much shorter development window than ME1 and ME2. With NME they will have a lot more time, and we already know exploration and the Mako is returning. I will not be surprised if we see a return of the inventory system as well.

 

ME2 and ME3 didn't have that much difference in development time. ME3 followed ME2's paths simply because it was the right one. Bioware knew it found what they were looking for in ME2. And that will be also true about NME. It will bring back exploration, which is great. And it can even bring back inventory or "deeper" customization and it will still feel more like ME2 than ME1. And the reason for that is ME1's gameplay didn't have an identity, it was just a collection of things which didn't work together. To that Bioware won't go back to. 

[KrrKs]

Maybe the discussion whether ME:Number is/was a RPG or not should be put into another thread.

[Nitrocuban]

I bet BW will extend on what they did when moving from ME2 to ME3 - bringing back the good parts from ME1 they totally skipped in ME2 but in an overhauled version like weapon mods and grenades.

I'm pretty sure we not only get planetary exploration but also  customizable armors and some more stuff

[Vazgen]

Maybe the discussion whether ME:Number is/was a RPG or not should be put into another thread.

True. I apologize for derailing the thread

[fyz306903]

I'd actually like ME3 system of finding the weapons hidden around each map. Although for upgrades, I'd like a variation of ME2's resource gathering. BUT to improve this (IMO) the idea of paying for probes and fuel should be scrapped. Just make it so that when you run out of either, you have to fly back to  a mother base (the 'ark'?) to stock up for free. Also, make resources a little bit more abundant than in ME2, so it's possible to max out your upgrades if you work for them. Or better yet, make a new game + where you keep your upgrades and make resource/weapon availability linked to your difficulty level! (100% more resources on casual, 'ME2' level of resources on Normal and half as many resources on extreme). Keep ME3's gun upgrade system (loved that). 

[StealthGamer92]

 It will bring back exploration, which is great. And it can even bring back inventory or "deeper" customization and it will still feel more like ME2 than ME1. And the reason for that is ME1's gameplay didn't have an identity, it was just a collection of things which didn't work together. To that Bioware won't go back to. 

Se we think of ME next in the same way in terms of how it can work? Why are we arguing again?  I never wante ME1 combat back. I liked it but I knew that meant it was too slowly paced for others. I liked ME2/3 maping three powers through LB, RB, and Y(Xbox). I would like ME1 variety with ME3 progression in powers.This is a personal preference, but I think ME needs to lose the ME2/3 system of picking up weapons at a certain are on a certain level. This system does not feel like a reward for playing but instead it feels like a handout.

 

 I think a system that has stores SIMILAR(not exactly like but in that general feel) to ME1 combined with random gun drops or something would be better. The stores in ME3 were a good first step but each store should have all of that manufacturers weapons and armor. Streamlined as you said.

[StealthGamer92]

I'd actually like ME3 system of finding the weapons hidden around each map.

They weren't hidden though. They were just laid at your feet except(at the most) 4-5.

[Vazgen]

They weren't hidden though. They were just laid at your feet except(at the most) 4-5.

Weapons? Yes. Weapon mods? No. I still continue to find new mods. 

[StealthGamer92]

Weapons? Yes. Weapon mods? No. I still continue to find new mods. 

True. I forgot those pesky mods. But it was possible to hide mods because theire size. Put a mod on a shelf with some books it was easy to miss. Put a gun anywher and well...its still easy to spot due to its size and shape. The only gun in ME3 that was realy hiden was that "big iron" assault rifle on the mission where you finaly meet Miranda's "dad". I never knew it was there until I saw it in my stratedgy guide.

[Vazgen]

True. I forgot those pesky mods. But it was possible to hide mods because theire size. Put a mod on a shelf with some books it was easy to miss. Put a gun anywher and well...its still easy to spot due to its size and shape. The only gun in ME3 that was realy hiden was that "big iron" assault rifle on the mission where you finaly meet Miranda's "dad". I never knew it was there until I saw it in my stratedgy guide.

There is one mod on Jacob's mission. When you have to climb a ladder to the AA guns you need to keep going and it's hidden behind crates. I've only discovered it thanks to RedCaesar's video. Put a weapon there and you can easily miss it. Same on Thessia, right before climbing to the sniper perch. There are places where you can hide a Widow and player might not notice it. 

Guns and armor are quite easy to find in ME3, although a few require some work. I, for example, missed Serrice Council Legs more than once. Point is, hiding things is easy and they've done it in ME3 to some extent

[StealthGamer92]

There is one mod on Jacob's mission. When you have to climb a ladder to the AA guns you need to keep going and it's hidden behind crates. I've only discovered it thanks to RedCaesar's video. Put a weapon there and you can easily miss it. Same on Thessia, right before climbing to the sniper perch. There are places where you can hide a Widow and player might not notice it. 

Guns and armor are quite easy to find in ME3, although a few require some work. I, for example, missed Serrice Council Legs more than once. Point is, hiding things is easy and they've done it in ME3 to some extent

Very true. My bigest problem with ME3 is that I like to explore the areas so I rarely missed anything. My first playthrough i only missed Assault Rifle barel 5, that "big Iron" gun, and the football(american football) helmet head gear. So if I wanted to buy my gear I had to force myself to not pick it up, which is harder than I thought since press A to pick up is more reflex than choice. The stuff should be in a store from the start to avoid this. Have some requirement to unlock it that lets someone like me unlock it for purchase before a certain mission and someone else find it in that mission if that feature is as popular as it sounds.

[SNascimento]

Se we think of ME next in the same way in terms of how it can work? Why are we arguing again?  I never wante ME1 combat back. I liked it but I knew that meant it was too slowly paced for others. I liked ME2/3 maping three powers through LB, RB, and Y(Xbox). I would like ME1 variety with ME3 progression in powers.This is a personal preference, but I think ME needs to lose the ME2/3 system of picking up weapons at a certain are on a certain level. This system does not feel like a reward for playing but instead it feels like a handout.

 

 I think a system that has stores SIMILAR(not exactly like but in that general feel) to ME1 combined with random gun drops or something would be better. The stores in ME3 were a good first step but each store should have all of that manufacturers weapons and armor. Streamlined as you said.

I think it's because although I want exploration back I say exploration in ME1 was bad.