229 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.youtube....h?v=lOcTKLWLvqs

Now, for the first time, I worry that DA4 will suck.

[Il Divo]

Personally I find most of the gameplay mechanics of the old school RPGs to be incredibly clunky and annoying to use.

 

So I'd say that has improved with time.

 

That's largely my stance. In general, I'm not a fan of DnD 2.0. What that translates to is that old schools games that are very dialogue heavy (like Planescape), I still end up loving. But for games which rely on combat mechanics more (Baldur's Gate 1, Icewind Dale, etc) I find them pretty much unplayable. 

[pdusen]

There's some disagreement as to what BioWare is.
I still think if BioWare as the company that made NWN. Where can I find those games now?

Fair enough. I think of Bioware as the company that made several of my favorite games, starting with KOTOR. I never played NWN and see no reason to do so, based on my experience with more recent old-school crpgs.

The next game would be entirely standalone. Each game could use a different canon.

I don't really see what in that statement is supposed to convince me that resetting choices in each subsequent game is worthwhile.

[Il Divo]

@Gothfather:  Shadowrun: Dragonfall left you flat?  MADNESS. 

 

@LinksOcarina: 

 

-  "Interactive novel vs. interactive screenplay."  Well said.  Movies take far less imagination to experience than a novel.  In fact, movies take no imagination to experience as nearly every sense is fed to you via the medium.  You are simply absorbing someone elses imagination.  Likewise... the new Bioware cinematic experience is far less an imaginative experience than past games.  People will rage and disagree... but they're wrong (I'm open minded like that). 

 

"An actor who is going to deliver that line for you..."  *shudder*

 

It's an interesting point. I always find this odd in the sense that, while interactive novels require more imagination than interactive film, in a lot of ways, they're also much farther from the pen and paper experience because of the emphasis on headcanon. 

 

I'd go so far as to say that Bioware's recent cinematic games are a much more accurate representation of the pen and paper experience as it relates to character interaction. 

 

Edit: Actually, even from a game mechanics stand-point, a lot of what we ask from our RPGs based on top down would probably be looked down on in pen and paper. 

[sjsharp2011]

I am happy that lots of people disagree with OP.
I ll state my recent experience with an recent old school rpg 5 months ago. Divine Divinity.
While the game was indeed good i cound not get past the ARCHAIC mechanics and gameplay this game featured.
I literally could not stand having to manually heal after every fight with a single healing spell that i had to cast 2 times outside of combat with a cooldown for each party member
Different inventory for each party member = and i thought DaI and Witcher3 menu was cumbersome. NO
lots of pointless walking from a to b for fetch quests. 
Dialogue was good though although NON voiced actor was kinda killing the mood.
Fights that punish you with a loooong loading screen if you fail, and you fail cause this game requires trial and error, just like old rpgs.
i really really really appreciated DaI9da2,daO, conviniencies and i literally realised all 3 games have quite the thought in them.

SO yeah, archaic mechanics need to die.

Nope i ll pass. i am not spoiled from new games but i value reasonable progression as my free time is not the same as years ago.
As a note i played DaI on nightmare with most trials on and finished it in 3 months in 250 hours. i do play a lot but there was real progression.

Yeah I'm a relative newcomer to RPG's as I only started playing them around the time ME came out. When  I first played DAO I did feel overwhelmed so I can imagine playing older ones. I didn't really understand the mechanics of the game or anything until this time last year after I bought the strategy guide for the game. But now htanks to a greater understanding of how the game works I can now design my characters exactly how I want them to play and now find it a lot moer fun. |Thankfyully DA2 and DAI simplified it yes some may say that was a bad thing but for me I'd say it was a good thing as I personally felt hte original was over complicated. I do have Kotor though I find that complicated but now I have a better undrestanding odf how these sorts of gamres work I'm hopeful nexttime I play it I can get a bit further with it knowing the mechanics behind these games.

[LinksOcarina]

It's an interesting point. I always find this odd in the sense that, while interactive novels require more imagination than interactive film, in a lot of ways, they're also much farther from the pen and paper experience because of the emphasis on headcanon. 

 

I'd go so far as to say that Bioware's recent cinematic games are a much more accurate representation of the pen and paper experience as it relates to character interaction. 

 

Edit: Actually, even from a game mechanics stand-point, a lot of what we ask from our RPGs based on top down would probably be looked down on in pen and paper. 

 

Well no video game has ever gotten a 1-1 representation of game mechanics correct.

 

The truth of the matter is a bit more complex...

 

Another video to consider. 

 

[capn233]

Mass Effect should stay Mass Effect.

[LinksOcarina]

@Gothfather:  Shadowrun: Dragonfall left you flat?  MADNESS. 

 

@LinksOcarina: 

 

-  "Interactive novel vs. interactive screenplay."  Well said.  Movies take far less imagination to experience than a novel.  In fact, movies take no imagination to experience as nearly every sense is fed to you via the medium.  You are simply absorbing someone elses imagination.  Likewise... the new Bioware cinematic experience is far less an imaginative experience than past games.  People will rage and disagree... but they're wrong (I'm open minded like that). 

 

"An actor who is going to deliver that line for you..."  *shudder*

 

True, but games still follow more interactive medium anyway versus movies due to input by the player. Check out Marshall McLuhan on hot vs cool media in the end, it kind of puts it into perspective. Or, this piece that I wrote awhile back on Player Agency. 

[Iakus]

Mass Effect should stay Mass Effect.

At this point what is "Mass Effect" anyway? 

 

It's reinvented itself so many times does it even have an identity anymore?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Fair enough. I think of Bioware as the company that made several of my favorite games, starting with KOTOR. I never played NWN and see no reason to do so, based on my experience with more recent old-school crpgs.


I don't really see what in that statement is supposed to convince me that resetting choices in each subsequent game is worthwhile.

I'd like the design not to be constrained by the need to support all possible outcomes in future titles. That need severely limits what we can do in this title.

We can't lose, for example. We can't change sides. We can't actually free the mages. We can't destroy the Chantry. We can't permanently tear the veil. We can't destroy the Citadel. We can't cure the genophage in ME1. We can't kill Leliana. We can't let Loghain have Ferelden in exchange for his help against the Blight.

The devs only let us do those things that won't break future games. And since they don't know what the future games actually are, they need to offer us only a very narrow range of choices.

For these games to be a proper simulation, those limits need to be removed.

[goishen]

At this point what is "Mass Effect" anyway? 

 

It's reinvented itself so many times does it even have an identity anymore?

 

 

At which point did it ever have an identity other than reinventing itself, if you're making the argument that 1, 2, and 3 were all separate games that reinvented themselves?

[capn233]

At this point what is "Mass Effect" anyway? 

 

It's reinvented itself so many times does it even have an identity anymore?

 

Not really.  The gameplay had a big shift once.  Most of the other changes have been relatively minor.

 

It has never really been a classic RPG in any sense.

[Sylvius the Mad]

True, but games still follow more interactive medium anyway versus movies due to input by the player. Check out Marshall McLuhan on hot vs cool media in the end, it kind of puts it into perspective. Or, this piece that I wrote awhile back on Player Agency.

Good article.

Bartle was right; MUDs aren't games.

Neither are RPGs.

[LinksOcarina]

I'd like the design not to be constrained by the need to support all possible outcomes in future titles. That need severely limits what we can do in this title.

We can't lose, for example. We can't change sides. We can't actually free the mages. We can't destroy the Chantry. We can't permanently tear the veil. We can't destroy the Citadel. We can't cure the genophage in ME1. We can't kill Leliana. We can't let Loghain have Ferelden in exchange for his help against the Blight.

The devs only let us do those things that won't break future games. And since they don't know what the future games actually are, they need to offer us only a very narrow range of choices.

For these games to be a proper simulation, those limits need to be removed.

 

But the Dev's have been doing that for years. You can't join up with Sarevok, you can't avoid the Nakshel mines, you can't ignore Irenicus and you are always Darth Revan.

 

It has been their sandbox, we have been playing in it with limits the entire time. It's how video game RPG's are made. The video above I posted on Arcanum and Vampire summed it up, you have all of these options, but few avenues to utilize them in a moment for your character because the game is always limited by time, memory, and budget. It is a compromise we have to face, and sometimes those options are fickle in what they allow you to do in a situation. 

[RoboticWater]

At this point what is "Mass Effect" anyway? 

 

It's reinvented itself so many times does it even have an identity anymore?

That's hyperbolic. Mass Effect's evolutionary trajectory has been fairly obvious: it has always been and continues to be a sci-fi TPS RPG with a cinematic atmosphere and some degree of player choice. Obviously, the emphasis on each of these features has varied with each entry, but one would need to be blind to not see the through-line.

[Iakus]

That's hyperbolic. Mass Effect's evolutionary trajectory has been fairly obvious: it has always been and continues to be a sci-fi TPS RPG with a cinematic atmosphere and some degree of player choice. Obviously, the emphasis on each of these features has varied with each entry, but one would need to be blind to not see the through-line.

Mass Effect is a sci-fi game, but what kind of game?  What kind of story?  What kind of atmosphere?

 

What separates Mass Effect from any other scifi setting?

[Sylvius the Mad]

But the Dev's have been doing that for years. You can't join up with Sarevok, you can't avoid the Nakshel mines, you can't ignore Irenicus and you are always Darth Revan.

Sarevok would have to willing to join up with you for that first one to work.

But that we can't ignore Irenicus is a huge problem with BG2. BG2 doesn't let us do anything that doesn't follow the path BioWare laid out for us. Imagine how different BG2 would be if we could explore it freely, without having all of the areas gated by quest-givers.

I would argue that we can avoid the Nashkel mines. BG does a great job of not forcing us to go there, and it doesn't even force on us the information that would lead us there. This is why BG was BioWare's best story - because the story was hidden from us until we went to find it.

Your Revan example misses the point. KotOR does give us those divergent outcomes. We can react the the Revan discovery pretty much however we want. We can have it influence our character design or not, as we see fit. Really, what I'm asking for is NWN's character creation, BG's story structure (or DA2's, which was nearly as good), and KotOR's divergent endings.

It has been their sandbox, we have been playing in it with limits the entire time. It's how video game RPG's are made. The video above I posted on Arcanum and Vampire summed it up, you have all of these options, but few avenues to utilize them in a moment for your character because the game is always limited by time, memory, and budget. It is a compromise we have to face, and sometimes those options are fickle in what they allow you to do in a situation.

Why does no one cite Arena when making these comparisons? Or the original Might & Magic? Or AutoDuel? Or any of the CRPGs that just dropped you in the world with little or no guidance.

Those limits you describe are much harder to see if we're not explicitly told what to do.

[Nohvarr]

Player choice and many other things that game companies did with their games is what made RPGs great back then, I remember being able to choose from 6 different choices on how to deal with raiders in the old fallout... Same for the old BioWare here is what I mean - 

 

Here, support these following kickstarters, as that's much more useful than hoping Bioware will suddenly go back to this form of game.

 

Project Resurgence - https://www.kickstar...ject-resurgence

ChemCapter: The World's first Chemistry RPG - https://www.kickstar...t-chemistry-rpg

Consortium: The Tower - https://www.kickstar...rtium-the-tower

[AlanC9]

But that we can't ignore Irenicus is a huge problem with BG2. BG2 doesn't let us do anything that doesn't follow the path BioWare laid out for us. Imagine how different BG2 would be if we could explore it freely, without having all of the areas gated by quest-givers.

These are two different things. The BG2 areas are only made available by quest-givers, but most of them aren't related to Irenicus.

[NM_Che56]

You mean ink ribbons?

Sure!

[Medhia_Nox]

It's an interesting point. I always find this odd in the sense that, while interactive novels require more imagination than interactive film, in a lot of ways, they're also much farther from the pen and paper experience because of the emphasis on headcanon. 

 

I'd go so far as to say that Bioware's recent cinematic games are a much more accurate representation of the pen and paper experience as it relates to character interaction. 

 

Edit: Actually, even from a game mechanics stand-point, a lot of what we ask from our RPGs based on top down would probably be looked down on in pen and paper. 

 

Interesting that your PnP experience doesn't involve a lot of headcanon. 

 

The story (as opposed to the rules) is entirely in your head.

[AlanC9]

Interesting that your PnP experience doesn't involve a lot of headcanon.

Well, in PnP you don't need headcanon. You've got the guy who writes the other characters right there, so you can convert it into just plain canon right away. Or get the idea shot down right away, depending.

[Drakoriz]

i know this will make me unpopular, but is a opinion and is my opinion =P.

 

I think the RPG 90 style game where the dialogue was so heavy was in part to the lack of graphics so they need to transmit ALOT using dialogues lines, while back in the day that was good, this days where game exploit the graphics and level design so much, they dont need those heavy dialogues.

 

If u actually go back to games like Morrowind or Baldur gate, u will see most of the dialogues options just circle around the same, but they try imply diferents thinks.

 

Another think is, that on ME and probably ME A, we arent playing as the nameless hero as we use to play on Baldur gate or Morrowind. We play a a set character (that can look different) but is a set character.

 

For me, this new style of RPG are good, why 1 i dont have as much time as i used to have to play. And second i discover and sit in front my computer to have fun and dont get stuck on a endless conversation about politics (something that some of the dialogues on Witcher 3 suffer, and i tent to get bored playing that game)

 

I think what Bioware achieve with DA I and ME 3 is a good balance. LOL i hate when they put that 3 option pic about Inquisition when isnt true and most conversation have 4-5 options, and multiples "ask question and find about lore" options.

 

Again, this is just my opinion not trying to fight with anyone =P

[Angry_Elcor]

They could do that, but it wouldn't do any good...

 

 

Without proper training, the newbs wouldn't know how to use one, anyway.

[SNascimento]

Those are just internet jokes with very little hard truth to them.

Anyway, Andromeda won't go back to 90's RPGs. It will be a step foward, just like all three games were. Or at least tried to be.