124 réponses à ce sujet

[Seraphim24]

It depends on how the RPG elements are handled.

 

In SWTOR you had stats like armor and force power, and I was trying to compare whether 3 armor was worth 8 force power or something on some gloves or whatever.

 

So I set about calculating conversion ratios and the like and it turns out like 8 force power gave like 1.003434 more damage or something whereas the armor gave like .3473472 more mitigation and based on the relative numbers in their absolute categories, the force power was probably matter. It's kind of ridiculous honestly.

 

In D&D, 18 Intellect meant the ability to use 9th level spells, 17 intellect means you can't, it's a big and noticeable and understandable difference.

[Iakus]

 

So I set about calculating conversion ratios and the like and it turns out like 8 force power gave like 1.003434 more damage or something whereas the armor gave like .3473472 more mitigation and based on the relative numbers in their absolute categories, the force power was probably matter. It's kind of ridiculous honestly.

 

That's a bit more math than I'd like to have in my RPGs...

[Seraphim24]

That's a bit more math than I'd like to have in my RPGs...

 

Exactly.

 

The thing is they changed it in KoTFE to have force power and like willpower just be mastery or soemthing.. and yet the comparison I was doing between armor rating and power so it's like BONED AGAIN!!!

[Ahglock]

In D&D, 18 Intellect meant the ability to use 9th level spells, 17 intellect means you can't, it's a big and noticeable and understandable difference.

Old school. I can't fully explain why but 2e was my favorite.

[CronoDragoon]

I've noticed how the ME franchise has slowly more towards its action orientation at the price of role-playing.

 

Mass Effect 3 is as much an RPG as 1. Mass Effect 1 is a shooter with RPG elements, like 3. Unlike 3, it's terrible as a shooter and bloated with crap as an RPG.

[Arcian]

Duh.

[Display Name Owner]

Not having a dig, but are looting and choosing from a range of weapons strictly an RPG element? I dunno, it just seems to me that sometimes the whole argument of how much of an RPG ME is comes from having an overly tight checklist for what makes an RPG. I mean, in ME - you are playing a role. A malleable role that you can somewhat tailor to your own wishes. Ransacking crates does not an RPG make tbh.

Also, upping the shooter aspects isn't some kind of shift from RPG to shooter, I mean, it's an action RPG. Improving the action aspect is just logical isn't it?

 

All I'm saying is that the things mentioned in the OP are just a list of improvements to ME's features, which obviously I'm in favour of. Also, if you ask me, ME3 had the best weapons and looting system. ME1's stacks of guns and armour was over the top, and ME2's armoury was way too sparse. ME3's was good fun - nice range of guns, and each one actually felt different. I guess I wouldn't be against a few more guns and armour choices though, why not?

 

That said, I'm hoping Andromeda goes a bit more sandboxy than 2 and 3.

[Iakus]

Not having a dig, but are looting and choosing from a range of weapons strictly an RPG element? I dunno, it just seems to me that sometimes the whole argument of how much of an RPG ME is comes from having an overly tight checklist for what makes an RPG. I mean, in ME - you are playing a role. A malleable role that you can somewhat tailor to your own wishes. Ransacking crates does not an RPG make tbh.

Also, upping the shooter aspects isn't some kind of shift from RPG to shooter, I mean, it's an action RPG. Improving the action aspect is just logical isn't it?

 

All I'm saying is that the things mentioned in the OP are just a list of improvements to ME's features, which obviously I'm in favour of. Also, if you ask me, ME3 had the best weapons and looting system. ME1's stacks of guns and armour was over the top, and ME2's armoury was way too sparse. ME3's was good fun - nice range of guns, and each one actually felt different. I guess I wouldn't be against a few more guns and armour choices though, why not?

 

That said, I'm hoping Andromeda goes a bit more sandboxy than 2 and 3.

Loot and gear do not by themselves define an RPG  But they are common ways to shape the role you play in a game.  It's part of shaping and defining your character.

 

The thing is, though, Mass Effect over time made it harder and harder to define Shepard as action become more and more emphasized.  Sure the gun selection and workbench of ME3 was probably the best "loot system" of the three.  But look at how much else was lost as well. 

 

As well as being able to do almost nothing about the appearance of the companions.

[RoboticWater]

I honestly think that DA:I would have benefitted from just cutting out all the grey level items after you reach level 5 (or just cut them out entirely). Items with +5% health or damage are almost completely useless, barely contribute to character customization, and just end up cluttering the inventory. Preferably, items would provide non-negligible benefits (potentially with detriments as well) such that character customization is more about specialization and finding the most harmonious item-to-class builds rather than constantly equipping items with slightly higher stats. DA:I is essentially like this mid to late game, and the customization becomes a lot more interesting; however, you still end up with a bunch of grey items taking up space for no other reason than to be sold at a later point. I have a similar view towards weapons: significant side-grades or bust. ME3 was excellent in this regard, so as long as BioWare maintain their standards, everything will be fine.

 

It'd also be nice of stat-affecting customization items were kept mostly separate from visual customization. Rather than swapping out the entire armor piece, maybe stat-affecting items could change an armor's underlay or something. DA:I was a step in the right direction with schematics and tinting, but schematics still had fixed stat ranges making certain looks unviable after a while. I don't see any gameplay or thematic benefit to forcing the player to choose between looking cool and being effective (unless ME:A is secretly about the destructive force that is vanity), so why not?

[Pasquale1234]

Mass Effect 3 is as much an RPG as 1. Mass Effect 1 is a shooter with RPG elements, like 3. Unlike 3, it's terrible as a shooter and bloated with crap as an RPG.

I'm not quite sure how you define shooter, but role-playing became more and more difficult as the series progressed.

ME1 was the only entry in the trilogy that included non-combat skills. Removing them made it more combat-focused.

ME1 provided open world exploration, which I find to be a fertile ground for emergent narrative creation, role-playing, and enhanced tactical opportunities. It also allowed the player to equip squadmates with armor. ME2 & 3 were relatively linear, with content meted out bit by bit, and most of the encounters took place in corridors littered with waist-high cover and thermal clips. ME3 also had some lengthy segments of cutscenes piled on cutscenes sprinkled with autodialogue, effectively eliminating player agency during significant portions of the game.

[CronoDragoon]

I'm not quite sure how you define shooter, but role-playing became more and more difficult as the series progressed.

Well considering the OP's dichotomy of action vs. RPG (which I take to mean combat decided by numbers and dice rolls), I took it to mean in reference to its combat. If it was speaking to the increased focus on combat in 2 and 3, that doesn't really tell us what is more or less an RPG, given games like Wizardry that are almost entirely about combat yet are certainly RPGs.
 

ME1 provided open world exploration, which I find to be a fertile ground for emergent narrative creation, role-playing, and enhanced tactical opportunities. It also allowed the player to equip squadmates with armor. ME2 & 3 were relatively linear, with content meted out bit by bit, and most of the encounters took place in corridors littered with waist-high cover and thermal clips. ME3 also had some lengthy segments of cutscenes piled on cutscenes sprinkled with autodialogue, effectively eliminating player agency during significant portions of the game.

I did not find any of the exploration in ME1 provided role-playing opportunities. Unless you mean a Shepard who knew the act of exploring was stupid given the plot.

I don't see what corridors have to do with RPG vs. action, but I don't find ME1's arenas to be meaningfully different in this sense.

The more cinematic dialogue and fewer middle options are indeed minuses against it, though I tend to think the Reputation system balances that out by not punishing players for playing something other than pure Paragon or Renegade.

[Sidney]

I think I came at Mass Effect from the direction of an rpg rather than a shooter.  And as the series went on, I've been left to feel more and more out in the cold as Bioware has abandoned its roots.
 
Some stuff that might bring that feeling back, in no particular order;.
 
A more customizable talent tree, (one thing I think DA2 did right was this.)
 
More dialogue options.  Not like we can get much less, of course
 
More modular armor.  Both for the protagonist and followers
 
More armor/outfit styles, for protagonist and companions.  I don't want to be stuck with someone else's concept of "sexy marine"
 
Non-combat based talents (hacking, lockpicking, knowledge-based skills, healing, crafting etc)

Talent trees got better as it went on. I never liked ME1s insanely incremental leveling system -- leveling up felt so pointless so often. For that reason I was always conflicted over ME2 where I liked the decisions about how to allocate points or reserve them but at the same time left me leveling up and "getting nothing" for it.

Not sure what more dialog means. More like what? The old BG usually didn't have more than 6 options and usually if they did several were the same. I've never felt a lack of options per se. What I do feel is, and this always exists, a lack of motivation behind what I say. Nothing annoyed me more than in DAO Morrigan losing respect for me for "helping" Redcliffe. I was never given an option to say "I'm not doing this to help these filthy peasants but in order to gain a powerful ally to help myself." I guess that is a more option but to me it isn't just about having more ways to say the same things but really being able to express different motivations.

I don't like piddling around with armor much and I really dislike it on my companions -- these people are my allies not my servants. I can't really tell them how to dress like it is the army. I did like that Boone in FNV wouldn't wear the "better" legion armor I tried to give him. I actually liked ME2s system where they got the improvements but still were "themselves".

I dislike armor progression. Everyone talks about "choice" in DAO but everyone was most likely wearing the same set of armor at the end - almost 100% if you didn't have a couple of DLCs and the preorder armor. Those suits were hands down the best in the game and it was irrational to pick otherwise because there were no trade offs. I thought ME3 hit the right balance in terms of choice without a ton of administrative overhead.

[Pasquale1234]

Well considering the OP's dichotomy of action vs. RPG (which I take to mean combat decided by numbers and dice rolls), I took it to mean in reference to its combat. If it was speaking to the increased focus on combat in 2 and 3, that doesn't really tell us what is more or less an RPG, given games like Wizardry that are almost entirely about combat yet are certainly RPGs.

There is a dichotomy between action and RPG. Action games tend to rely on the player's skills rather than the character's. That said, ME always was marketed as an action RPG, though ME1 included weapon specific skills that increased the characters' (including squadmates) effectiveness with specific weapons. It also included non-combat skills.
 

I did not find any of the exploration in ME1 provided role-playing opportunities. Unless you mean a Shepard who knew the act of exploring was stupid given the plot.

I take it you're not interested in creating emergent narrative via gameplay, then?
 

I don't see what corridors have to do with RPG vs. action, but I don't find ME1's arenas to be meaningfully different in this sense.

When an enemy stronghold is sitting on the middle of a planet's map, Shepard has multiple approach options. You can rush it with the Mako (from whatever direction you choose), park the Mako and snipe, etc. There are more opportunities to employ different tactics, and express what kind of strategist Shepard is.
 

The more cinematic dialogue and fewer middle options are indeed minuses against it, though I tend to think the Reputation system balances that out by not punishing players for playing something other than pure Paragon or Renegade.

That was certainly welcome after the P/R mechanics of ME2.

[Sidney]

I'm not quite sure how you define shooter, but role-playing became more and more difficult as the series progressed.ME1 was the only entry in the trilogy that included non-combat skills. Removing them made it more combat-focused.ME1 provided open world exploration, which I find to be a fertile ground for emergent narrative creation, role-playing, and enhanced tactical opportunities. It also allowed the player to equip squadmates with armor. ME2 & 3 were relatively linear, with content meted out bit by bit, and most of the encounters took place in corridors littered with waist-high cover and thermal clips. ME3 also had some lengthy segments of cutscenes piled on cutscenes sprinkled with autodialogue, effectively eliminating player agency during significant portions of the game.

I disagree that exploration did much for me as a role player. Nothing about driving the MAKO to the biotic extremist's camp makes it more role playing than taking the ME2 style drop ship to the front door of the building. That encounter is role playing but the exploration has diddly to do with it. Clearly nothing about probes, writings or rocks was much role playing other than trying to ignore your missions while drinking around with this stuff. 2 and 3 at least try and provide excuses for side activities while 1 doesn't even bother.

I'm not sure how 1 is any less "linear" combat wise. The UCWs use the same building which isn't even a corridor...it is a room. Ilos is a long corridor. Virmire is a long corridor...well all the story missions are long corridors inside the MAKO which is substantially worse than anything in 2 or 3 because the MAKO had basically nothing to do with my character and everything to do with me being able to aim and jump over shots. The fight at the start in the club is basically a fight...in a room. The battle on Eden prime is a long "corridor". All of these places had a ton of low cover. The encounter design didn't get worse or really even all that different. The fights got better because the combat system got better and the allied and enemy AI got monumentally less dumb.

[CronoDragoon]

I take it you're not interested in creating emergent narrative via gameplay, then?

I might be if its recognized by the game. I'm just not sure what picking up minerals does for an emergent narrative.

Is emergent narrative via gameplay something exclusive to RPGs?

[Sidney]

I might be if its recognized by the game. I'm just not sure what picking up minerals does for an emergent narrative.Is emergent narrative via gameplay something exclusive to RPGs?

I get people who like the emergent narrative and I can see narrative emerging in a table top game....but in computer games I can emerge all sorts of narratives but if the world doesn't interact with that who cares?. Is that even a narrative at that point and if it is then you can emerge anything. I can pretend my Shep likes to free style rap, while doing extreme sports and shot gunning cheap beer...that's nice but so what?

[javeart]

I've noticed how the ME franchise has slowly more towards its action orientation at the price of role-playing.

 

Should Bioware continue like this? Should they add in things like a (better) loot system, such as picking up weapons and armour from fallen enemies, deeper customisation (especially for armour, but I think that is one thing they said they are addressing), more class specialisations, more freedom in the way the story is played?

 

What do you guys think?

 

I'm in for more class specialisations andmore freedom in the way the story is played. But I'm no fan of looting and the like... That doesn't mean I don't want more on that direction, it's that I just don't care, it'd probably have no impact at all in most of my plathroughs

 

 

Sometimes it's nice to play a game that doesn't take 20 minutes of your life selling useless crap to a phony merchant for every hour spent actually playing it. >.<

 

I agree sooooo much 

 

edit:

 

I disagree that exploration did much for me as a role player. Nothing about driving the MAKO to the biotic extremist's camp makes it more role playing than taking the ME2 style drop ship to the front door of the building. That encounter is role playing but the exploration has diddly to do with it. Clearly nothing about probes, writings or rocks was much role playing other than trying to ignore your missions while drinking around with this stuff. 2 and 3 at least try and provide excuses for side activities while 1 doesn't even bother.
 

 

And with this

[CronoDragoon]

I will also say that I approach role-playing very different than I think a lot of people do. I never see myself as the character. I'm just an invisible force observing a story but also secretly manipulating it. I guess the closest analogy I could give would be that I'm the director of a movie who hasn't read the script.

This means that a lot of the headcanon and backstory crafting done by players is unappealing to me. I can suppose the character had a traumatic experience at the age of six, but unless this fact appears in the game it's not worth anything. For that reason I really liked the times in Dragon Age: Inquisition where NPCs will simply ask you about your past, because once the character says it, it becomes real.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

I don't hate customization, but it's mods that I can't actually see a difference in what it actually does. I can attach a bayonet to my rifle, and what does level 2 do better than 1? Other than the blade MAYBE looks slightly different but it doesn't look like it helps me take down an enemy any better. I would like to see weapon and armor mods that do more than a difference that is next to impossible to see.

 

I mean I can see a vast difference in the clip mods that increase thermal clips Shepard and company use in their very firearms.  

[Lvl20DM]

With Andromeda's apparent emphasis on exploration this time around, we might see some room for noncombat skills. I could imagine Speech/Persuasion type skills, or abilities/skills that directly aid exploration by revealing areas of interest on the map. Maybe enhancements to the haul from finding resources, etc. Much of this could also be handled by class selection (with Engineers gaining different noncombat benefits than Soldiers, for example).

 

I hope they stick with an inventory system much like ME3. I like that everything Shep carries can actually be seen on the character. I'm not a fan of the "magical backpack" of most RPG's (unless it is  actually magic, like a bag of holding). Greater customization of you and your companions is always welcome, however. I'd like to see teh companion armor system be more advanced than ME3, but still allow for the squadmates to have their own unique look and personality. I think they did a great job of this in DA:I, though ME3 certainly wouldn't need to be as detailed (and the radically different body types of the various aliens would make it that much more demanding anyway).

 

We don't know much about the story, but I'm hoping  it gives plenty of excuses for us to explore. ME1 had loads of planets and side quests, but on my first play-through I barely touched them. This is because I assumed that the "Race Against Time" described in my log was literal - that I was under a time limit. And you really should be, particularly after Virmire. 

[yolobastien6412]

Well considering the OP's dichotomy of action vs. RPG (which I take to mean combat decided by numbers and dice rolls), I took it to mean in reference to its combat. If it was speaking to the increased focus on combat in 2 and 3, that doesn't really tell us what is more or less an RPG, given games like Wizardry that are almost entirely about combat yet are certainly RPGs.

I did not mean to dichotomise Action and RPG. All I meant was that elements in the "rpg scale" or whatever you want to call it (elements which are associated with rpg games) were slowly left out for improvements elsewhere (be it in combat or whatnot). Certainly the improvements in combat were great, especially in ME3 with the cover system greatly improved. But I would like to see more emphasis on the "with rpg elements" in ME:A, especially since we know it's going to be about exploration.

[Seraphim24]

Old school. I can't fully explain why but 2e was my favorite.

 

For that reason I was alluding to I assume, every stat was meaningful. They used to have it in BW games too when 8 int meant you couldn't speak properly but 10 solved that issue, and stuff like that.

[Beerfish]

Just get rid of multiplayer and use all of those resources and money to make a better rpg.

[FKA_Servo]

Just get rid of multiplayer and use all of those resources and money to make a better rpg.

 

Unfortunately, I think it's probably all the ninnies throwing real money at ammo boxes that are funding the RPG in the first place.

[Ahglock]

For that reason I was alluding to I assume, every stat was meaningful. They used to have it in BW games too when 8 int meant you couldn't speak properly but 10 solved that issue, and stuff like that.

That was one of the reeasons but it was quirky for some stats. But, I also liked the save system better. Yeah a handful of saves like vs wands made it weird but I preferred the easy saves once you got medium to high level. It made save or die/else spells a real gamble, the magic resistance system, the absolute curb stomping damage fighters did, the monster manual and its ecology, the huge range of bizarre magic items, etc. it had issues like single class thieves being weak in a standard game but all its quirks blended together into a awesome whole.