195 réponses à ce sujet

[MickeyAnarch]

Man785 wrote...

Some of the most respected games of all time are Shooter/RPG hybrids. Dues Ex and System Shock 2 come to mind. How does this even effect the quality of a game?

I love the game but they did gut many of the things I really loved about ME1.  However, that's not the reason for my post.  Just wanted to compare notes about the games... I loved Deus Ex (still one of the best games of all time), however, System Shock (the original) was generations better than #2 (much like Deus Ex 2 was no comparision to 1). 

Not a "serious" discussion just a litte to lighten the mood :whistle:

Modifié par MickeyAnarch, 28 janvier 2010 - 04:51 .

[Thompson family]

Druss99 wrote...

Thompson family wrote...

I'm going to start keeping a count of how many threads are started per day on this very same topic.

Expect even more tomorrow when Europe gets it too. Good luck keeping track of it.

Yeah, I'm going to need a high-level omnitool.

[prototypex89]

TourOfSpace wrote...

the game isn't watered down, in reality they increased the difficulty of the game, by limiting the choices you can make and the points given they made it more difficult to choose what to upgrade, add to that once you max out an option it evolves into a better skill and choice. i agree with the addition of the ammunition and restriction of skills for team members, it adds challenge and actualyl skill to the game, where as before you could literally just hold down the right trigger and run around, now you actually have to time your shots and think about your next move in real time. i'm tired of people complaining, the fact is the game is great, it's more action oriented which adds more excitment, and as for character development, the point of less conversation is to give the feeling that your bonds are being forged by fire and battle. enjoy the game and enjoy the story

I agree I mean I don't think its perfect but I am very happy with it and im glad compared with the first mass effect I actually have to think instead of just running holding the trigger I mean I would have liked more options to spend my skill points on but hey they fixed the elevator issue the mass effect 1 had so i happy

[abadomen]

Bigeyez wrote...

abadomen wrote...

Ryuuichi009 wrote...

RPG elements?

I'm not being sarcastic or anything but that seems to be the root of the issue. All of you guys seem to have different thoughts on what exactly RPG elements are.

To me RPG = your character build determining his/her prowess in battle. So would ME2 be an rpg to me?

Build?

Well that depends...do you mean a pre-built build...or a build you improve?

ME2 has very few skills to choose from.

ME1 was on the lite side of the RPG spectrum...ME2 is even more lite.

I am still enjoying the game...but I agree with those complaining about the RPG-element change(subtraction) found in ME2.

If you enjoy shooters and lite-rpg elements then you'll enjoy the game.

Does the number of skills really matter when most of those skills were pointless pre-reqs you HAD to put points into in order to get the stuff you really wanted...I think not. If anything that impedes choice more then it grants choice.

Cutting out the useless skills is a step forward in my book. Now I can actually go straight in the meat of what I want and decide which skills, THAT MATTER, I want to improve. Then add to that evolving mechanics for me and my squad and the skill system ends up being much deeper then it was in ME 1.

I'd like to add...I don't think ME1 was the pinnacle of RPGs...it lacked many elements as well....especially skills.

[GEWill]

ME2 has a much more aggressive theme than ME1 so there needed to be more fighting. The story is everybit as good and a lot better in most areas than 1 and the frequency of fights definitely fits. I don't see why people see this as a shooter to be frankly honest. Action-RPG meaning blended elements where as shooters are basically just that, shooters.

[abadomen]

GEWill wrote...

ME2 has a much more aggressive theme than ME1 so there needed to be more fighting. The story is everybit as good and a lot better in most areas than 1 and the frequency of fights definitely fits. I don't see why people see this as a shooter to be frankly honest. Action-RPG meaning blended elements where as shooters are basically just that, shooters.

Agreed. Though...I've only just gotten 7 hours through the game(and only have finished Omega...I'm slow...) and I feel the areas are superior to ME1.

Don't feel the story has been sacrificed...hopefully the game continue to make me think this way.

[Mister Mage]

II Hunt3r II wrote...

Mister Mage wrote...

I think if people just clarified and talked about what they wanted rather than using really big and horrendously outdated classification terms that apply to a million different things and have a million separate idiotic personal definitions, we'd all do a bit better.

For example. Instead of saying "add more RPG", you can just say "I am a genre fanatic that requires a Fallout 2-type game. Make that." So much better.

Alright, here we go:

-Bring back weapon cooldown. Don't make it as extreme as ME1. Keep the thermal clip system, this way, players can choose to either have their weapon cooldown or "reload" to keep shooting.

-Allow the player to make minor upgrades to weapons. For example, let the player upgrade his weapon's heat sink so that it cools down faster/can fire more rounds before needing to be replaced.

-Bring back loot.

-Let there be weapons and armor that the player can buy/find. Make them fairly expensive, and/or hard to find in the environment. The player should only be able to change the armor his character is wearing.

-Keep the armor 'upgrade' system like it is now. I like it.

-And keep the ammo types on the power wheel. I love it.

How's that?

This is actually a ton better.  When people stop arguing over the semantics of "RPG" and "Shooter", I think we get to a place where an actual discussion can take place.

I actually think cooldown should take LONGER if it's brought back.  That way, you can keep using the weapon, but there's a serious downside to not using thermal clips(making them still be an important resource).

Should upgrades happen at mission start, or on the fly?  Perhaps at certain checkpoints?  I think that preparing your gun for the mission ahead of time is the best option.  The power wheel is a minimalist interface, an inventory would not be.  To not interrupt the gameplay with menus, I think the menus should instead just be moved to the start of the mission.  Similar to ME2, but with more options for customization.

I'm not exactly sure what you want back when you say "loot".

I think money for guns doesn't make too much sense.  I think the system they have now is good, but we need more stuff we can buy so credits aren't erroneous.  In an open world it is really hard to lock off things for purchase until later, but you might be able to do it with progress monitoring and having Shepard gain contacts as he advances in the mission(that each have the next upgrade tier after the one he just got no matter what order Shepard meets them in).


And I have to agree with you on armor, though I'm not sure I'm sold on ammo.  Ammo doesn't seem "right" as a power.  It seems like types of ammo should be "things".  Soldiers should benefit from more guns and powers that give them more strength/defense, with perhaps a branching system of class advancement that allows them to focus either on defenses or aggressive close-range action.

[Xyxzor]

Bioware is suppose to make RPG's not shooters. My main problem is as game developers they are suppose to add features not take away them. I love the improvement to the combat don't get my wrong, but they are seriously lacking in the customization department. That was one of the few selling points of the original Mass Effect and I feel like they really cut corners. The good news is that most if not all the problems with ME2 can be fixed with DLC, whether or not they will, is there choice.

[abadomen]

Xyxzor wrote...

Bioware is suppose to make RPG's not shooters. My main problem is as game developers they are suppose to add features not take away them. I love the improvement to the combat don't get my wrong, but they are seriously lacking in the customization department. That was one of the few selling points of the original Mass Effect and I feel like they really cut corners. The good news is that most if not all the problems with ME2 can be fixed with DLC, whether or not they will, is there choice.

I feel it was a give and take....

I would agree there may be less customization in some areas...but I like the armor customization a bit better...as far as tint, style, etc goes. Though...I hope they release more types along the way. Free of course...

[rockchild123]

I really dont believe a thing from BioWare anymore because they said this game was an improvement based on players feedback from ME1. WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP. And its not like its a bad game its just not what it should be (or we were hoping it was going to be). The RPG elements are what made this game and especially the replaying of this game. I feel it will be lacking in replay for ME2. It is the difference between a good game and a great game. Sacrificed too much for shooter elements.

[Xyxzor]

abadomen wrote...

Xyxzor wrote...

Bioware is suppose to make RPG's not shooters. My main problem is as game developers they are suppose to add features not take away them. I love the improvement to the combat don't get my wrong, but they are seriously lacking in the customization department. That was one of the few selling points of the original Mass Effect and I feel like they really cut corners. The good news is that most if not all the problems with ME2 can be fixed with DLC, whether or not they will, is there choice.

I feel it was a give and take....

I would agree there may be less customization in some areas...but I like the armor customization a bit better...as far as tint, style, etc goes. Though...I hope they release more types along the way. Free of course...

My biggest problem with the armor customization is the lack of sets. I felt like they were going to improve, add more, and allow you to customize sets, instead they give you a couple options to mix and match, the ability to customize your companions armor is completely gone. Also why didn't they extend the same grace to weapons? 

Modifié par Xyxzor, 28 janvier 2010 - 06:16 .

[rockchild123]

I have feeling for all my complaining about ME2 that if I was to pick up ME1 and start playing again I would miss alot of what ME2 has to offer. This is where I loose my cool and start smashing both games together in an attempt to get the game I hoped for. BioWare basterds!

[Atranes]

While I like the ME2 story so far (5 or 6 hours in), the emphasized focus on shooter-style gameplay has convinced me that I am at a disadvantage having not played other shooters (ME1 is the only quasi-shooter I've ever played). On most games I automatically ratchet up the difficulty, but with ME2 I'm having a hard time on Normal. I'm just not familiar with shooter mechanics and so the gameplay is really frustrating. So, going way back to the OP, I want to love the roleplaying aspects of the game for the story, but the learning curve on the shooter gameplay is really offputting for someone not otherwise used to that gameplay.

[Shipwr3K]

Xyxzor wrote...

Bioware is suppose to make RPG's not shooters. My main problem is as game developers they are suppose to add features not take away them. I love the improvement to the combat don't get my wrong, but they are seriously lacking in the customization department. That was one of the few selling points of the original Mass Effect and I feel like they really cut corners. The good news is that most if not all the problems with ME2 can be fixed with DLC, whether or not they will, is there choice.

Bioware's first game ever is in fact a shooter. 

[saxo_g]

I haven't played the new game, and it's sitting somewhere below DA: Awakening on my "must-acquire" list, but frankly I found Mass Effect to be very much a shooter with RPG elements rather than the other way around. While I did get the sense that the characters became more powerful over time, I didn't perceive combat to be stat-based (even if it was) and the story seemed to be only marginally impacted by any decisions I made. The loot system was passable but I found the constant need to both a) omni-gel items because I hit a cap and swap components to try to get a few more points of damage out of my Mk XVI rifle extremely irritating. Once you levelled Shepard and his crew up enough, you could pretty much play the game like a shooter, and I seem to recall that's what I did.

[JabberJaww]

Murmillos wrote...

Because that's what they wanted Mass Effect to be.
If you want a full real time classic RPG, play Dragon Age.
If don't like Action RPG's, that has more in the Action and less on the RPG, the Mass Effect may not be for you.
Again, BioWare is not selling out to the shooter crowd or they would have never made Dragon Age in such short order.

QFT

Its always been a hybrid shooter/RPG

[rockchild123]

Shipwr3K wrote...

Xyxzor wrote...

Bioware is suppose to make RPG's not shooters. My main problem is as game developers they are suppose to add features not take away them. I love the improvement to the combat don't get my wrong, but they are seriously lacking in the customization department. That was one of the few selling points of the original Mass Effect and I feel like they really cut corners. The good news is that most if not all the problems with ME2 can be fixed with DLC, whether or not they will, is there choice.

Bioware's first game ever is in fact a shooter. 

My first bodily function was producing a piece of crap doesnt mean I have to keep doing it or worse....call it soemthing its not.

[Shipwr3K]

i love me shooters, and i have always wanted a long to complete shooter, most of them are short, with a straight forward story line.

[kab]

They did a lot of stupid things that ruin immersion and make it feel like more of a shooter with levels than a world you're exploring in an RPG.



1. Fast travel, everywhere.

2. Completely removing secondary planets to explore.

3. Small areas, nothing like hitting the gigantic Citadel only to find that all those places you can fast travel are just the same area with the two locations twenty feet apart.

4. The mission screens. Horrendous.

5. The obtrusive "Hold F to end mission".



The list goes on. There's no taking an elevator up to your quarters, instead you stare at a loading screen. There's no walking in and out of the ship, instead you just teleport from the middle of space to the middle of a station, a very small station. You finish a mission and suddenly teleport back to the ship, and out of the station, into the middle of space.



Seriously, where's my immersion? Thrown under the bus, that's where.

[Starhaus]

The new interface stinks. Even as a shooter it stinks since you can't even crouch any more. Most shooters let you both crouch and jump. In ME you can do neither, but instead get this ridiculous "shelter" command which has your character running around outside of your control as it glues itself to the nearest surface.

[Chief_Suspect_75]

Kquark wrote...

I do not like or play shooter type games, Mass Effect KOTOR and Drage Age are RPG games first and shooters second. ME and the others had deeper character development and much better story lines. in ME 2 its seems the story is just a reason to get into another fight. I will continue to play it and maybe things will improve.

It is a great looking game and if you like shooters  I am sure you will enjoy it

soo... when you played ME1 you completed it without shooting anything!?


in any case, ME1 WAS a shooter, it was a squad based shooter, the only element taken from RPG's being that your stats had an influence over your weapon skills and power - but where you aimed, was where you SHOT.


If ME1 was an RPG first as you say , then you would click to select a target, and then choose an attack and a dice roll would decide whether or not you hit, and how much.

If you need an example of a space shooter that WAS a total RPG, then google "Earth & Beyond", which coincidentally was an EA game.

[HiveMindZeta]

I wanted to dump on this game because of the changes BioWare made. After reading the posts here, that's changed. I can accept the changes to the game but it really feels like they've changed a few too many elements from Mass Effect that Mass Effect 2 feels like a completely different game. I loved ME for the fact that it was a shooter/RPG hybrid, frankly I'm sick to death of JRPGs and turn based combat etc. ME had real character, genuinely good story and I could have a conversation with Liara for 10 solid minutes trying to get into her pants. The conversation trees that you can grow with NPCs is outstanding. ME2 has thus far kept that aspect and if it hadn't I wouldn't be here, I would be getting my money back.

Combat and exploration suffer however, because people with short attention spans didn't want to bother with all that "garbage" in ME so ME2 suffers the loss of it. I loved all the side missions that you could come across through exploration. I've only been playing ME2 for 9 hours, so I'm sure there is plenty more for me to discover. For all I know this is premature. My issue with combat however isn't premature. Why in the face of the crippled zombie Jesus himself would you take away the aspect of gaining experience from killing enemies? What could possibly possess anybody to do that in an RPG? For me that is a very key element of an RPG and without it the game feels really hollow. It's a small thing in the grand scheme of it, but I feel really let down by this.

[Chief_Suspect_75]

[quote]kab wrote..
They did a lot of stupid things that ruin immersion and make it feel like more of a shooter with levels than a world you're exploring in an RPG.

1. Fast travel, everywhere.
2. Completely removing secondary planets to explore.
3. Small areas, nothing like hitting the gigantic Citadel only to find that all those places you can fast travel are just the same area with the two locations twenty feet apart.
4. The mission screens. Horrendous.
5. The obtrusive "Hold F to end mission".

You could fast travel everywhere in the first ME game too ya know.

As for pt 2, go play Elite II.

[JabberJaww]

We gamers can be so ridiculous.



We have blinders on, and rarely come out of the box. Especially with a game's so called Genre.



There are plently of shooters that give the pure shooter fan their fix, there are plenty of solid pure RPG titles to give that crowd their fix.



BioWare has tried something a bit different with the ME title. For me, i understood going in that this was not a pure classic RPG. It has RPG and Shooter elements. They have always stressed this. I am more of an RPG fan than a shooter, but i still love ME2 as i did ME1. I have Dragon Age to sooth my RPG beast. This game is a different experience that needs to be approached different.



Its a fun ride

[homer_san]

there are many traditional RPG clones. and Borderland does a poor job integrating RPG & shooter.



I like the direction ME2 is heading.