89 réponses à ce sujet

[Abriael_CG]

Twitchmonkey wrote...
Well, if all you care about is going
renegade or paragon then yes, the game does allow for this, but if you
actually want to think, then the game allows for that too. There are a
lot of issues that are complex and if you aren't content to either just
choose the paragon or renegade option (something you could do in ME1 as
well) then there is a lot of space to define your character's values.
The only problem is that as with ME1, your choices don't immediately
effect anything greatly. At least not immediately, we'll see how things
go in ME3.

You're missing the point. if you mix up Renegade and Paragon you'll just end up with a not very believable mildly psychotic wacko with no real defined personality.

The big problem is that most choices have an extremely predictable outcome that will make you either get the white "alien-friendly sympathetic paladin"  or the "chaotic stupid violent trigger happy rogue". Even without reading the options, you know what's going to happen. In other games (DA:O is an example) there are many choices that place you in a grey area, and you have to actually think "What could happen if i do this?" and quite a few times, you will get an outcome that makes perfect sense, but it's not what you predicted.

ME2 simply places you on two set railway tracks with many switches that make you move between them, but whatever you do, you're almost always confined to them.

That's not much of a choice.

Its quite simple, Bioware understands what an RPG is, even if you do not, and wanted to try something new. The game has its problems, but that supposed "appeaseing" is not a cause.

Of course, now disagreeing with your vision of what an RPG is means "not understanding what an RPG is". 

You probably could use re-reading a few dungeons & dragons manuals yourself.

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 31 janvier 2010 - 08:44 .

[novaseeker]

In an RPG your character's skills determine whether what you want them to do succeeds or not. That is not the case in ME2, really -- other than in a very watered-down way. Instead, your own skillz determine what happens -- and that is in no way RPG.



What ME2 is is a very entertaining and well-made game that is best described as a "storyline shooter". It has a great storyline, and its combat mechanics are pretty much straight shooter. More descriptive than mucking around with the term "RPG" when so many RPG elements (including the crucial combat element) have been stripped or made player-driven, rather than character-driven.

[Twitchmonkey]

Abriael_CG wrote...

You're missing the point. if you mix up Renegade and Paragon you'll just end up with a not very believable mildly psychotic wacko with no real defined personality.

The big problem is that most choices have an extremely predictable outcome that will make you either get the white "alien-friendly sympathetic paladin"  or the "chaotic stupid violent trigger happy rogue". Even without reading the options, you know what's going to happen. In other games (DA:O is an example) there are many choices that place you in a grey area, and you have to actually think "What could happen if i do this?" and quite a few times, you will get an outcome that makes perfect sense, but it's not what you predicted.

ME2 simply places you on two set railway tracks with many switches that make you move between them, but whatever you do, you're almost always confined to them.

That's not much of a choice.

I don't see the problem with taking a stand against some issues and supporting others according to how your character would act. I'm sitting at about 25% renegade 75% paragon because I'm operating according to what I think my character would choose, not what the game tells me is paragon or renegade and it's going great. DA was a lot like this. Maybe you give the peasant a few coins so he can get a meal but grant no mercy to the bandit because of your character's value system. The results aren't particularly amazing in either game, usually your choices simply reflect on your favor with your party or change some things in that twon, not having much in terms of consequences beyond that.

[Aoyei]

Many things make up an RPG, mass effect is no less or more an RPG then kotor or fallout. In my opinion the differances are needed, i couldnt imagine playing Mass effect turnbased, or kotor as an action game, these differences are what make each different and awsome.

[Abriael_CG]

Aoyei wrote...

Many things make up an RPG, mass effect is no less or more an RPG then kotor or fallout. In my opinion the differances are needed, i couldnt imagine playing Mass effect turnbased, or kotor as an action game, these differences are what make each different and awsome.

Many things make up an RPG, and Mass Effect 2 is missing almost all of them. Are those left enough to make it an RPG? That's debatable.
But it's definitely not the "Definition of a Real RPG". Hence, the topic is pretty moot.

[Schurge]

Of course, now disagreeing with your vision of what an RPG is means "not understanding what an RPG is".

Exactly.

novaseeker wrote...

In an RPG your character's skills determine whether what you want them to do succeeds or not. That is not the case in ME2, really -- other than in a very watered-down way. Instead, your own skillz determine what happens -- and that is in no way RPG.

I am sorry you think every RPG needs to be Final Fantasy II.

novaseeker wrote...

What ME2 is is a very entertaining and well-made game that is best described as a "storyline shooter". It has a great storyline, and its combat mechanics are pretty much straight shooter. More descriptive than mucking around with the term "RPG" when so many RPG elements (including the crucial combat element) have been stripped or made player-driven, rather than character-driven.

So dice rolls = RPG? So the game needs to do everything for you?

[Flash_in_the_flesh]

Agree with OP. The definition of RPG doesn't equal DnD and even if it's what people expect from an RPG, it doesn't mean ME2 is a bad game. It's just not what you expected.

Modifié par Flash_in_the_flesh, 31 janvier 2010 - 09:16 .

[Abriael_CG]

Flash_in_the_flesh wrote...

Agree with OP. The definition of RPG doesn't equal DnD and even if it's what people expect from an RPG, it doesn't mean ME2 is a bad game. It's just not that you expected.

Not being an RPG doesn't actually mean it's a bad game. But not being a bad game (it's actually a pretty good shooter) doesn't make it a full fledged RPG, and even less the "Definition of a Real RPG".

[chestersmurf]

I agree that it is a true RPG. I think sometimes people get lost in the inventory systems and depth of skills and forget that the genre is about playing a ROLE. which is clearly done very well, I felt like I was shepard during every moment of the game. I think its sad that because the game is progressing the genre to be more than just inventory and skills that people are freaking out. It is like they say, with all change comes resistance.



Don't get me wrong I love other RPG games with inventories including DAO but I feel like this is a nice fresh take on the genre

[Twitchmonkey]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Many things make up an RPG, and Mass Effect 2 is missing almost all of them. Are those left enough to make it an RPG? That's debatable.
But it's definitely not the "Definition of a Real RPG". Hence, the topic is pretty moot.

RPGs typically include certain things, the question is do those things make the RPG or do they just tend to come along? Most RPGS have a fantasy setting (less so now than some time ago, partially thanks to BW) does that mean a game is less of an RPG if it doesn't have a fantasy setting?

[Evil Johnny 666]

Why can't rpgs evolve, change? ME2 IS an RPG just a different one. Shooters changed, rpgs can change too. Seriously, there's so much rpgs out there, you can still play them, why make the same thing over and over again? I think it just proves how Bioware is a good studio. They refuse to stay on their laurels and copy the same thing again, they challenge themselves and make different things. That's what everyone should do, that's why Infinity Ward is a weak studio always doing the same ****ing thing all over again. If they wanted a quick cash, they could have kept the same exact system like Gears of War 2 and release it months before it got out and made more money by saving developing time.

[Abriael_CG]

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...

Why can't rpgs evolve, change?

Why should RPGs turn into another, already existant, genre, being severely dumbed down in the process?

We alrady have shooters, we don't need RPGs to overlap with them.

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 31 janvier 2010 - 09:18 .

[xxSgt_Reed_24xx]

*applause*



very well said.

[Schurge]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...

Why can't rpgs evolve, change?

Why should RPGs turn into another, already existant, genre, being severely dumbed down in the process?

We alrady have shooters, we don't need RPGs to overlap with them.

Okay, lets stay with turn based perma-death no skill RPGs which consist of dungeons, random encounters, and monster slimes and giant rats.

[Aoyei]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Aoyei wrote...

Many things make up an RPG, mass effect is no less or more an RPG then kotor or fallout. In my opinion the differances are needed, i couldnt imagine playing Mass effect turnbased, or kotor as an action game, these differences are what make each different and awsome.

Many things make up an RPG, and Mass Effect 2 is missing almost all of them. Are those left enough to make it an RPG? That's debatable.
But it's definitely not the "Definition of a Real RPG". Hence, the topic is pretty moot.

thats your opinion and this is ours, is that wrong, while yes, Schurge didnt exactly put it well, its an opinion, not gonna say your wrong, but to me, mass effect 2 is more of an RPG then a shooter and will be that way no matter what anyone says, and im sure no one can change your view

[novaseeker]

So dice rolls = RPG? So the game needs to do everything for you?

Your own skills determining whether your character succeeds at doing something is most decidedly not an RPG mechanic.

Look, ME2 is a very good game, it just isn't an RPG.  It's a shooter with a storyline.  ME1 was a hyrbid because the combat wasn't straight shooter.  Fallout 3 was a hybrid because its combat could be played as an FPS or as an RPG style using VATS.  ME2, though, is straight up shooter in terms of the combat.

Modifié par novaseeker, 31 janvier 2010 - 09:26 .

[Abriael_CG]

Schurge wrote...

Okay, lets stay with turn based perma-death no skill RPGs which consist of dungeons, random encounters, and monster slimes and giant rats.

Actually western RPGs haven't been mostly turn based for years. Dungeons? You have plenty dungeon crawling in Mass Effect 2. The dungeons just are much smaller and much more linear, which, of course, is another dumbing down of the genre.

"go to point A to point B shooting everything that moves" isn't exactly the perfect ideal of depth now, is it?

Modifié par Abriael_CG, 31 janvier 2010 - 09:23 .

[Geofftheted]

chestersmurf wrote...

I agree that it is a true RPG. I think sometimes people get lost in the inventory systems and depth of skills and forget that the genre is about playing a ROLE. which is clearly done very well, I felt like I was shepard during every moment of the game. I think its sad that because the game is progressing the genre to be more than just inventory and skills that people are freaking out. It is like they say, with all change comes resistance.

Don't get me wrong I love other RPG games with inventories including DAO but I feel like this is a nice fresh take on the genre

^This

ME1's nventory system was cumbersome and tacky, and skill system made it so you had to have certain party members with you or you had to divert points away from key skills to make up for them. ME2 just streamlined every thing that was great about it in the first place, and apparently hid all the updates to cleaverly for most people who complain about it. I personally want to see ME1 redone ME2 style.

on a side note if you played the game purely choosing one choice or another because it was renegade or paragon, your doing it wrong. Put the contorller down. Go do some tabletop gaming, and then come back and play tthrough the mass effects correctly.

[Evil Johnny 666]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Evil Johnny 666 wrote...

Why can't rpgs evolve, change?

Why should RPGs turn into another, already existant, genre, being severely dumbed down in the process?

We alrady have shooters, we don't need RPGs to overlap with them.

We? Sorry change isn't something that comes with universal praise. Dumbed down? I think that having a REAL shooting gameplay instead of a "well it's a squad based shooter, but we don't want it to be a real shooter" is putting more depth in gameplay than anything else. The inventory is the ship and I find it to be a pretty good evolution as it's more immersive. About immersion, I really think ME2 went to the right direction, everything was made by seeing which direction the game should take: an immersive, cinematic, emotionally engaged and action packed game. Too much micromanagement and you take some immersion out, by taking them out and putting them into something else, into something that takes part of the universe (as the inventory ship), you've got something much more deep, Mass Effect 2 feels a lot more complete and wholesome in that way. RPG overlapping with shooters? Sorry, but an RPG has to more or less overlap with another genre, unless there is no combat. Fantasy rpgs pretty much overlap with action games, Mass Effect just happens to do that with shooters while not doing things half assed. Again, it's all a matter of opinions.

[Flash_in_the_flesh]

Why do we have to evaluate each game basing on how close it is to each genre? Why can't we enjoy it as it is and forget about definitions. There's no other game like ME2. I'd rather call it an interactive movie experience.



ME2 is not a classical/pure/"real"/whatever RPG but it is an RPG. I don't care if there's 20, 50 or 80% of RPG in it, you can't measure it. Being more of a shooter, less of an RPG or the opposite won't change the fact that it's a very good game. One of a kind. Unique experience. Possible new genre, nothing we already know.

[Aoyei]

Abriael_CG wrote...

Schurge wrote...

Okay, lets stay with turn based perma-death no skill RPGs which consist of dungeons, random encounters, and monster slimes and giant rats.

Actually western RPGs haven't been mostly turn based for years. Dungeons? You have plenty dungeon crawling in Mass Effect 2. The dungeons just are much smaller and much more linear, which, of course, is another dumbing down of the genre.

"go to point A to point B shooting everything that moves" isn't exactly the perfect ideal of depth now, is it?

yea, i cant see sheperd going around and picking up 10 plant seeds either, but hey,if you realy dont like mass effect 2 why continue to post here and not just play dragon age or a different RPG?

[Lmaoboat]

chestersmurf wrote...

I agree that it is a true RPG. I think sometimes people get lost in the inventory systems and depth of skills and forget that the genre is about playing a ROLE. which is clearly done very well, I felt like I was shepard during every moment of the game. I think its sad that because the game is progressing the genre to be more than just inventory and skills that people are freaking out. It is like they say, with all change comes resistance.

Don't get me wrong I love other RPG games with inventories including DAO but I feel like this is a nice fresh take on the genre

By that logic, pong is an RPG in wich you play the ROLE of a paddel.

[Lmaoboat]

Aoyei wrote...

Abriael_CG wrote...

Schurge wrote...

Okay, lets stay with turn based perma-death no skill RPGs which consist of dungeons, random encounters, and monster slimes and giant rats.

Actually western RPGs haven't been mostly turn based for years. Dungeons? You have plenty dungeon crawling in Mass Effect 2. The dungeons just are much smaller and much more linear, which, of course, is another dumbing down of the genre.

"go to point A to point B shooting everything that moves" isn't exactly the perfect ideal of depth now, is it?

yea, i cant see sheperd going around and picking up 10 plant seeds either, but hey,if you realy dont like mass effect 2 why continue to post here and not just play dragon age or a different RPG?

No, he just goes around and picks up 20 dog tags.

[Schurge]

Abriael_CG wrote...

"go to point A to point B shooting everything that moves" isn't exactly the perfect ideal of depth now, is it?

Walking from Point A to Point B. Random encounter initiated. Susan hits fireball. Steve hits jump, Bob the Bard acts useless, Billy uses standard attack. Fireball kills enemy. Fight Over.

How is that for depth buddy?

[Aoyei]

Lmaoboat wrote...
No, he just goes around and picks up 20 dog tags.

your point? that was one mission and was completely option and dlc at that

Modifié par Aoyei, 31 janvier 2010 - 09:35 .