847 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Even 40 hours for one game can be a bit of a hassle for some folks. Usually I find I've got about 2 hours a day of free time at the most to play, and I don't have kids nor a job outside of the house. Three dogs of vastly different ages eats my time up too, with one 10 months (Wilbur,) one 5 years (Vivi, not a reference to DA) and one 12 years old (Zoidberg.) I typically play games with little to no cinematics where I can just level grind or whatever so I can save at a moments notice.

I didn't want to grow up. I wanted to stay a Toys R Us kid. Stupid adulthood...

That's why I'm glad I have no tiny human and/or animal related commitments. I just happen to work in a demanding high hour industry - so the very concept of free time is an absurdity.

[Il Divo]

I'm well aware that I won't ever play the majority of my Steam library.

As such, I've divorced the act of buying a game from the act of playing it. Each exists for its own sake.

 

Isn't that something of a money sink? 

[frylock23]

The strange thing is that I love Mass Effet 2 but as a part of a trilogy, I feel it should have had more to do with the Reaper conflict such as their arrival and the war because as a part of the trilogy, it feels like unnecessary filler. 

 

I felt like a lot of the elements introduced in Mass Effect 2 were not given the proper weight they were due: an example is Shepard's death and resurrection. This made some of the elements feel unnecessary and like they could have been swapped out with something else that did not warrant a weight that they could not provide.

 

To me, at times, it felt like ME2 was the writer's tantrum saying, "No! This is the trilogy beginning I really wanted!" So they kill and resurrect Shepard and try to break you away from everything you knew from ME1 to tell a totally different story that would lead to the same conclusion by a different route with a different cast of characters.

 

I might have been a lot happier with ME2's story had I not already had ME1 to set me up with a cast of characters I liked in the universe I didn't need to be re-introduced to.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Isn't that something of a money sink?

Each thing one buys is a money sink.

[RoboticWater]

Each thing one buys is a money sink.

I don't think that was the point of his question. He was likely wondering why you still buy a surplus of games even if you fully expect to never play them all. That seems like an unnecessary waste of money.

[sjsharp2011]

Omg get your hands off ME2. Some of us worship ME2 as a divine masterpiece.

Indeed in fact ME2 is my favourite of the trilogy

[sjsharp2011]

Unless I'm mistaken, wouldn't Cullen technically be this understudy? Isn't he the highest ranking Templar in Kirkwall after Meredith? 

I believe he was actually yes as I believe he was Meredith's second in command during DA2. Glad he sees sense in the end an stands up to her though

[Grieving Natashina]

I don't think that was the point of his question. He was likely wondering why you still buy a surplus of games even if you fully expect to never play them all. That seems like an unnecessary waste of money.

I never understood that. I don't have anything against players that collect a lot of games and don't play all of them. I don't get though, and I'm far too picky. I don't buy a lot of games for that reason and the games I do buy I tend to replay the crap out of. My father has over 200 games in his Steam library and over half of them he's never played.

As far as the topic goes, I'd like to think that the ME team learned from some of the missteps that many players have talked about in DA:I. I enjoyed the game, but I do think that there was a few too many "Collect 20 bear butts" quests. I know some folks enjoyed it, but I don't need nor want things like the Requisition Table that mainly serve as padding. I'd prefer fewer sidequests and less zones/planets in exchange for more quests directly related to the story. I don't think that there was a ton of "dead meaningless content," but I do feel like they could have trimmed down the fetch quests.

[KaiserShep]

I never understood that. I don't have anything against players that collect a lot of games and don't play all of them. I don't get though, and I'm far too picky. I don't buy a lot of games for that reason and the games I do buy I tend to replay the crap out of. My father has over 200 games in his Steam library and over half of them he's never played.

 

Yeah, part of me wants to have a big library to indulge in, but at the same time, I know I just won't put enough time into them and I'm very particular about the kind of game I will play on a regular basis. I put so many damn hours into the ME trilogy and DA series that I could never make much room, and then kill time with Destiny with some friends. I don't know when I'll ever finish FO4 and TW3. 

[sjsharp2011]

I never understood that. I don't have anything against players that collect a lot of games and don't play all of them. I don't get though, and I'm far too picky. I don't buy a lot of games for that reason and the games I do buy I tend to replay the crap out of. My father has over 200 games in his Steam library and over half of them he's never played.

As far as the topic goes, I'd like to think that the ME team learned from some of the missteps that many players have talked about in DA:I. I enjoyed the game, but I do think that there was a few too many "Collect 20 bear butts" quests. I know some folks enjoyed it, but I don't need nor want things like the Requisition Table that mainly serve as padding. I'd prefer fewer sidequests and less zones/planets in exchange for more quests directly related to the story. I don't think that there was a ton of "dead meaningless content," but I do feel like they could have trimmed down the fetch quests.

Yeah I don't tend to buy that many games these days but I do tend to buy games that I think I'll be playing moer than once I do have a fwe games in my library I haven't got around to plsying yet but keep promising myself I will at some stage.I just need to encourage myself to do it. I recently finished Rise of the TR a couple of days ago. I found it quiet an intense experience towards the end . So I'm allowing myself a breather by playing games I know are relatively gentle to play in that they'er moer about thinking my way through instead of button mashing my way through as I'm back playing DAI again and my plan right now is simply alternate between ME and DA and some of my sports games for the time being till I feel I'm ready to play something else. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I don't think that was the point of his question. He was likely wondering why you still buy a surplus of games even if you fully expect to never play them all. That seems like an unnecessary waste of money.

You're ignoring what I said about treating those two events separately.  What you say would be true if I bought games in order to play them.  But given the size of my unplayed library, that's clearly not the case.

 

No, I play games to play them.  I buy games to buy them.  Never the twain shall meet.

[Natureguy85]

No. I am suggesting that they planned and clearly placed within ME1 the symbolism that Shepard was a Messiah figure. The death and 'resurrection' of Shepard isn't THE example of the messiah archetype of Shepard. It is one of MANY, they exist in ME1, ME2 and ME3. The literary symbolism that Shepard is a messianic figure is in all three games. I am not implying that they knew ahead of time exactly what they would include as symbolism in each game but rather they deliberately and intentionally made Shepard a messiah archetype and use messiah literary symbolism to convey this to the player in the series and this was intended from first game onward.

 

Ok. There is something to that but I saw Shepard as more The Prophet than The Messiah in the first game.

 

No Sylvius has a narrow definition of what an RPG should and can be and if it doesn't fall within his predefined limits its 'wrong.' Not its just a style of RPG i don't like or RPGs have changed over the years and so on, it is objectively wrong. And that is his problem. He honestly believes that his subjective opinion on what makes a good rpg is objectively correct. He has zero understanding that the MARKET is made up of countless people that don't share his opinion and are just as valid in their opinion on what makes a good rpg as he is. He tries to convince people and bioware he is right and he has failed but he refuses to measure his success by other people. Which he thinks makes him wise but if you goal is to change opinion then measuring your success on what other people now believe is the only rational means of measuring success or failure.

 

This idea that participation trophy is all that matters so never measure success by other people is the rooted in narcissism. The love of self and self-esteem used to ignore the facts around you. Which is why he can't LET. IT. GO. that a voice protagonist is perfectly acceptable in an RPG he has to rail against it even though the market has clearly stated we don't mind the voice protagonist in fact we like it. (This is just one example of his pointless crusade about RPGs)  

 

[edit]Just to be clear his opinions on what an rpg should be are perfectly valid as its a subjective opinion that isn't the issue. Its the belief that subjective opinion is objective fact that is the problem.

 

My problem with it is that it leaves no place for two different ways of going about it as seen in Dragon Age Origins and Mass Effect. Shepard is more defined and leaves less room for RP than the Warden in Origins. Sylvius doesn't like this and that's fine. However, as you said, it would be going to far to say that ME did it wrong. It's just a different style. Maybe that makes it "less RPG" than Origins, but so be it.

 

 

 

 

The other one is what Skyrim does and lets you craft your own stories through the use of random encounters. The problem with DA:I is that, while the zones are more open and beautifully crafted, the encounters aren't actually all that random. There is no "This one time I ran into a Sabre Cat and nearly died so I ran off into a cave where I found this really cool item" like you can get in Skyrim because everything just feels so scripted.

 

This reminds me of one of my favorite aspects of FarCry 3. I loved that I would start a fight with a couple pirates and more would come to investigate, turning my quick hit into a firefight that moved into a "get the heck out of here" situation. Clearing outposts was fun but the lack of enemies that followed really killed the game.

 

 

That alone wouldn't provide an in-character reason.  After all, the

That's stupid.  That a checklist exists is no reason to complete it.

 

But people do them. There is a reason it's so popular to put achievements in games now.

 

 

Omg get your hands off ME2. Some of us worship ME2 as a divine masterpiece.

 

The main plot was trash.

 

Though shorter playtimes can be seen as a strength for other reasons. My Steam backlog's bad enough now. It'd be a lot worse if all of them were 200+ hour experiences.

 

I'm guilty. I buy them on the super sales. I do mean to play them but I also go back and replay games sometimes. I was doing XCOM long war, then replaying Metro Last Light to get the good endings, and now I'm playing FTL a lot again. I did finally start Alien Isolation and I'm loving it. I also reinstalled DOTA 2 and am sinking too many hours into that.

 

 

Indeed in fact ME2 is my favourite of the trilogy

 

It's also the most disconnected from the trilogy. It does have things going for it but it doesn't really fit.

[Sylvius the Mad]

My problem with it is that it leaves no place for two different ways of going about it as seen in Dragon Age Origins and Mass Effect. Shepard is more defined and leaves less room for RP than the Warden in Origins. Sylvius doesn't like this and that's fine. However, as you said, it would be going to far to say that ME did it wrong. It's just a different style. Maybe that makes it "less RPG" than Origins, but so be it.

If you're trying to make an RPG, then "more RPG" is definitionally better.

But people do them. There is a reason it's so popular to put achievements in games now.

What is that reason?

I have no idea why peolle pursue achievements, or try to accrue gamerscore, or whatever other meaningless counter they can climb.

If we don't understand how something works, then we shouldn't trust that it does work.

[Natureguy85]

If you're trying to make an RPG, then "more RPG" is definitionally better.
What is that reason?

I have no idea why peolle pursue achievements, or try to accrue gamerscore, or whatever other meaningless counter they can climb.

If we don't understand how something works, then we shouldn't trust that it does work.

 

They are trying to make a game. They decide ahead of time how much of an RPG it will or will not be.

 

The reason is that there are various psychological draws, whether that's beating your friends, a sense of accomplishment, or being one of a relative handful to complete a difficult or rare challenge. That none of these are draws for you doesn't mean they aren't widespread.

 

The last statement is totally untrue. We are constantly studying how or why things work after witnessing that they do.

[Sylvius the Mad]

They are trying to make a game. They decide ahead of time how much of an RPG it will or will not be.

I maintain that RPGs aren't games.

The reason is that there are various psychological draws, whether that's beating your friends, a sense of accomplishment, or being one of a relative handful to complete a difficult or rare challenge. That none of these are draws for you doesn't mean they aren't widespread.

Each person would have to consciously choose to have those factors matter. We could do that just as well without the achievements.

The last statement is totally untrue. We are constantly studying how or why things work after witnessing that they do.

We have evidence that they work, but until we understand the mechanism there's no reason to believe that evidence to be predictive, because we don't yet understand what confounding variables might exist.

[Master Warder Z_]

Well this is just getting sad now.

[Cyonan]

If you're trying to make an RPG, then "more RPG" is definitionally better.

 

They pretty obviously aren't trying to make a RPG with Mass Effect, so this is irrelevant.

[Natureguy85]

I maintain that RPGs aren't games.

 

I would like to know what you think the G stands for or in what way they are not games.

 

 

 

Each person would have to consciously choose to have those factors matter. We could do that just as well without the achievements.

 

That's not true. People can be drawn to things without consciously deciding it. It happens all the time and lots of companies have designed marketing or their entire business around it. Why do you think gambling is an industry?

[Natureguy85]

I maintain that RPGs aren't games.

 

I would like to know what you think the G stands for or in what way they are not games.

 

 

 

Each person would have to consciously choose to have those factors matter. We could do that just as well without the achievements.

 

That's not true. People can be drawn to things without consciously deciding it. It happens all the time and lots of companies have designed marketing or their entire business around it. Why do you think gambling is an industry?

[KaiserShep]

I maintain that RPGs aren't games.

 

 

This really depends on how you define what a game is in the first place, and how "role-playing games" don't fit.

[RoboticWater]

You're ignoring what I said about treating those two events separately.  What you say would be true if I bought games in order to play them.  But given the size of my unplayed library, that's clearly not the case.

 

No, I play games to play them.  I buy games to buy them.  Never the twain shall meet.

So you find the mere act of purchasing a game worth ~$5-60? OK, It's your money I suppose.

[straykat]

Of course, they're games. Games are basically two things. Pattern reading and choice making. Which RPGs have in droves. Strictly speaking combat mechanics, I mean. It doesn't matter if it's pnp or digital. A game is a game.

 

At least the good ones do this. If the "game" doesn't offer interesting patterns or and just rewards rote action (rather than making tactical decisions), then it's just a piece of crap. Which is why I hate MMOs. And critical of parts of DAI. Only then I'll say the RPG is not really a "game".

[sjsharp2011]

Ok. There is something to that but I saw Shepard as more The Prophet than The Messiah in the first game.

 

 

My problem with it is that it leaves no place for two different ways of going about it as seen in Dragon Age Origins and Mass Effect. Shepard is more defined and leaves less room for RP than the Warden in Origins. Sylvius doesn't like this and that's fine. However, as you said, it would be going to far to say that ME did it wrong. It's just a different style. Maybe that makes it "less RPG" than Origins, but so be it.

 

 

 

 

This reminds me of one of my favorite aspects of FarCry 3. I loved that I would start a fight with a couple pirates and more would come to investigate, turning my quick hit into a firefight that moved into a "get the heck out of here" situation. Clearing outposts was fun but the lack of enemies that followed really killed the game.

 

 

 

But people do them. There is a reason it's so popular to put achievements in games now.

 

 

 

The main plot was trash.

 

 

I'm guilty. I buy them on the super sales. I do mean to play them but I also go back and replay games sometimes. I was doing XCOM long war, then replaying Metro Last Light to get the good endings, and now I'm playing FTL a lot again. I did finally start Alien Isolation and I'm loving it. I also reinstalled DOTA 2 and am sinking too many hours into that.

 

 

 

It's also the most disconnected from the trilogy. It does have things going for it but it doesn't really fit.

That's your opinion but personally I'm fine with it.

[MrFob]

So you find the mere act of purchasing a game worth ~$5-60? OK, It's your money I suppose.

 

I know someone who does this with shoes ... and believe me, in comparison, $5-60 is a bargain. Wouldn't want to trade her for Sylvius though.

 

 

But seriously, I think anyone who has a pile of shame does this to an extent. I buy games that I would usually never buy in Steam sales and feel good just for getting the game for 5-10 bucks. I usually install and play all of them but I do have a lot of games in my library that got abandoned after 2 hours, either because they were not to my taste after all or because something else came up and I never got back. I don't really feel bad about this, Fortunately I can afford 5-10 bucks for this indulgence, it's fun and sometimes I even come across a title I really like and play longer (XCOM being an example). That said, I'd not spend the release day price for this.I am very picky when it comes to buying games for $50, not only to save money but also because IMO, it's more of a statement towards the game and the developer. Something like: "They have to do good work to earn that."

[Master Warder Z_]

I would like to know what you think the G stands for or in what way they are not games.

 

Dude, I would just drop this insanity right here but that' s me.