289 réponses à ce sujet

[Seraphim24]

DA2 and the Mass Effect games are, in many respects, JRPGs rather than western RPGs.

 

I don't even know to respond to that. 

 

Anyway, I more enjoyed watching the multiquote battle than actually participating in one, so I'll just... step aside... here. 

[Cyonan]

That wouldn't be much of an ability at all.

The ability in question slows time for one character only, but the duration is determined by the controlled character. So, if the ability is used by the controlled character, everything else appears to slow to 1/8 speed for 8 seconds. But, if the ability is used by an uncontrolled character, that character's speed is increased by 8x for 8 seconds.

The latter is obviously far more powerful, and it all depends which is the currently selected character.

 

That's not a balance issue then. That's an issue of inconsistent mechanics within an ability because somewhere along the lines somebody thought 1/8 speed for 8 seconds was the same as 8x speed for 8 seconds.

 

I'm more likely to call that a bug in need of fixing rather than a balance issue.

 

Using a different label for the two groups doesn't adequately convey that features have been lost in the transition from old to new.

 

Using a label that has a changed definition that was never 100% clear cut to begin with also doesn't covey the features that have been lost to most people.

 

Winning the campaign is very different from winning D&D.

And JRPGs never had any real claim to the RPG label. JRPGs arose from the Japanese tradition of interactive novels. They bore little resemblance to RPGs. They told a fairly linear story, often with set characters, and all the player really had to do was win battles to advance.

Western CRPGs tended to let you create your own character, and then drop you into the game world with little or no guidance. If there was a story, you had to go find it. I'm talking about Bard's Tale and Bard's Tale 2, Questron 1&2, Ultima 1-3, the early Might & Magic games, Phantasie... the list is long. I would argue that Baldur's Gate broadly followed that design as well.

 

The point was that they'd hold a very different definition of the term RPG from you.

 

JRPGs have every claim to the label, since we have decided they're similar enough to be included in very broad label. Further evidence that the general gaming community doesn't share your definition of the term RPG.

 

Also in Final Fantasy 1 they do drop you into a world with no guidance and you have to find the story.

 

I demand nothing. I just want to ensure that the consumer base is aware of what these games aren't, and I do so in the hopes that they will become that thing.

 

You demanded certainty out of the ME2 interrupts. You told me that yourself. It doesn't matter why you did it, you still did it.

 

The consumer base is aware of what the game is and isn't when we play it. They just don't really care what you personally want to call a RPG because the term is so ambiguously defined and always has been. By doing this on the BSN you're only reaching the consumers who are already aware that Mass Effect isn't the same as a old school RPG game because the majority of us are hardcore gamers who are aware of those old titles, if not actually played most of them.

 

The forums aren't even as listened to by the developers as we'd like to believe, unless we turn it into a massive controversy like we did the Mass Effect 3 ending.

 

But as you point out, the world doesn't cmshare my opinion. The world may well perceive Mass Effect as an RPG, and that's a problem for me. Eventually it won't be possible to describe the product I want using language the public understands. Orwell warned us about this.

 

The language changed and you refused to change with it. It's your own fault when you can't adequately describe the product you want.

[MyDamnAlterEgo]

Removing - NO. Improving - for instance, making the covers destructible and pierceable not only by you character's shots, but for enemy ones as well, and/or moveable by the explosions - YES.

[Seraphim24]

Also in Final Fantasy 1 they do drop you into a world with no guidance and you have to find the story.

 

FF11 is a much better example by the way. For those who don't know, it predated WoW, among other things. 

 

It pretty much wallops every WRPG, even "pure" open world stuff like Minecraft IMHO, in the open world department by a country mile save a handful. 

 

Although I don't really object to FF1-3 being used either since even though the geography was much smaller, they did have a very strong open world aesthetic nonetheless (with 3 actually perhaps surpassing 11, but tis not as noticeable to modern players perhaps)

 

Er, maybe not 2 as much, but, whatever. 

[Spectr61]

From Don Quixote -

"Just then they came in sight of thirty or forty windmills that rise from that plain. And no sooner did Don Quixote see them that he said to his squire, "Fortune is guiding our affairs better than we ourselves could have wished. Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them. With their spoils we shall begin to be rich for this is a righteous war and the removal of so foul a brood from off the face of the earth is a service God will bless."

"What giants?" asked Sancho Panza.

"Those you see over there," replied his master, "with their long arms. Some of them have arms well nigh two leagues in length."

"Take care, sir," cried Sancho. "Those over there are not giants but windmills. Those things that seem to be their arms are sails which, when they are whirled around by the wind, turn the millstone."
— Part 1, Chapter VIII. Of the valourous Don Quixote's success in the dreadful and never before imagined Adventure of the Windmills, with other events worthy of happy record"

Everyone's opinion is valid, at least to them; but are we "tilting at windmills" here with regard strict RPG classification?

Great conversation though..

[Sylvius the Mad]

The language changed and you refused to change with it. It's your own fault when you can't adequately describe the product you want.

The genre changed and I refused to change with it.

I will continue to expect roleplaying from roleplaying games. And if I filter Origin by genre, EA puts all of the ME games in the RPG category.

If they are RPGs, then they are RPGs. A is A. EA calls them RPGs. They might also be CBSs, but EA says they're RPGs.

RPG is a market niche I want filled. The ME games do not fill it.

[RoboticWater]

The genre changed and I refused to change with it.

I will continue to expect roleplaying from roleplaying games. And if I filter Origin by genre, EA puts all of the ME games in the RPG category.

If they are RPGs, then they are RPGs. A is A. EA calls them RPGs. They might also be CBSs, but EA says they're RPGs.

This statement is false given the context. Your "RPG" symbolically describes something different from everyone else's "RPG." Lexical symbols or terms are not pure logical constructs and cannot be equated so simply. Language is not perfectly consistent over time, space, or culture.
 
There still exists a genre that meets your requirements of RPG, but the term "RPG," has increased its scope beyond that specific genre in common language. Much like how the colloquial definition of peruse (to casually read) has become the opposite of its dictionary definition (to carefully read).

 

RPG is a market niche I want filled. The ME games do not fill it. 

Which isn't Mass Effect, BioWare, EA, or this forum's problem.

[Sylvius the Mad]

This statement is false given the context. Your "RPG" symbolically describes something different from everyone else's "RPG." Lexical symbols or terms are not pure logical constructs and cannot be equated so simply. Language is not perfectly consistent over time, space, or culture.

Until I can convince everyone to learn lojban, I'll just have to keep plugging away.

[RoboticWater]

Until I can convince everyone to learn lojban, I'll just have to keep plugging away.

Syntactic structure is irrelevant. Lojban, Esperanto, Loglan, or any other constructed language isn't going to prevent the gradual shift in vocabularies. Colloquialisms will be formed, new concepts will be invented, and understanding of genres will evolve.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Syntactic structure is irrelevant. Lojban, Esperanto, Loglan, or any other constructed language isn't going to prevent the gradual shift in vocabularies. Colloquialisms will be formed, new concepts will be invented, and understanding of genres will evolve.

Then we need formal definitions. That's the only way to have meaningful exchanges.

That was always the first step when I was getting my degree. Define terms, and only then can you get anywhere useful. Bertrand Russell wrote a whole book trying to enumerate all the different types of things in the universe, and in the end he only found two. But without formal definitions, he wouldn't have gotten anywhere.

[RoboticWater]

Then we need formal definitions. That's the only way to have meaningful exchanges.

I always have plenty of meaningful exchanges with others before we get onto this endless spiral of definitions. The problem must be on your end.

[capn233]

 Everyone's opinion is valid, at least to them; but are we "tilting at windmills" here with regard strict RPG classification?

 

I can't tell the Quixotes from the windmills.

[Cyonan]

The genre changed and I refused to change with it.

I will continue to expect roleplaying from roleplaying games. And if I filter Origin by genre, EA puts all of the ME games in the RPG category.

If they are RPGs, then they are RPGs. A is A. EA calls them RPGs. They might also be CBSs, but EA says they're RPGs.

RPG is a market niche I want filled. The ME games do not fill it.

 

Then there's a very simply solution I'm going to offer you: Don't play Mass Effect. It's clearly not a game you like anymore.

 

You're not defending some definition of a term here, because that term changed on you ages ago. It pretty much already had a different meaning by the time Mass Effect was even a thing. You lost that fight a long time ago.

 

Language changes and we don't all speak the same English they did hundreds of years ago. If you refuse to change with the times the only one that's going to be unable to have discussions with others is you.

 

The FPS genre changed into something I don't much care for these days, but I don't go around parading the idea that Call of Duty isn't a "Pure FPS" because that would just be inane. I simply don't play Call of Duty, because I tried it and I didn't like it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Then there's a very simply solution I'm going to offer you: Don't play Mass Effect. It's clearly not a game you like anymore.

ME2 made that very clear.  Remember, I had no plans at all to play ME3, and only decide to check it out years after it was released to investigate one specific aspect (and again, yet another area in which I disagreed with the masses, because I didn't think there was anything wrong with the endings.

 

I expected to like ME1.  I hoped to like ME2.  I knew I expected not to like ME3.  I also expect I wouldn't like MEA, though they haven't released enough information yet for me to have much confidence there.

You're not defending some definition of a term here, because that term changed on you ages ago. It pretty much already had a different meaning by the time Mass Effect was even a thing. You lost that fight a long time ago.

I will only lose when I stop fighting.

[RoboticWater]

I will only lose when I stop fighting.

Sure, you won't feel like you've lost, but that doesn't change the fact that you already have. More importantly however, you'll never win if you keep fighting on the wrong battlefields.