194 réponses à ce sujet

[LolaRuns]

The ability to actually interact with the world matters.

So what about Grand Theft Auto or Mafia? You can do things on the side or not do them so in that sense you have some control about the order of things (if you look at DragonAge, in regards to the main quest the order was something mandated as well, at least to some extent). Not to mention that it seems to me that many old RPGs DIDN'T allow you that much influence on the world At least not more than the "you killed the big bad, now everybody is happy" that you can also get from a shooter big boss. To me Fallout was the first game where I really noticed this "you affected this city in this way and that city in that way" but by no means all games had that.



I'm no great follower of JRPGs, but don't they limit your influence on the world drastically? As in there being mostly one real ending?

[Ahglock]

spock06 wrote...


But your success or failure in combat IS determined by your character just as much as your shooter skills.  If you dont level up any of your abilities good luck getting through some of the tough fights, especially on higher difficulty settings.  You keep saying ME2 has dropped the "core" of what makes an RPG...and as I keep asking what this "core" is, as well as stating what I feel it is (characters, story, player choice, dialogue) I am told that this has been said to me 5 times and I should shut up.  Yet looking through this thread I cannot find anywhere where you have said what you feel the core of a RPG is?  Statistic based gameplay? I am not trying to be offending I just want a straight answer.

Okay here is the 6th time then.:happy:   Gameplay is
usually determined in part by statistics attached to each character.

And in ME2 I'd say very little is determined by my stats, virtually everything is detemrined by my shooter skills.  If I upgrade my guns yeah they do more damage, if I max out inferno ammo yes it does more damage.  But all of my success is determined by my shooting skills, once that success happens I might have a bit of bonus damage due to my stats, but the suceess of the shooting was entirely determined by me.  That is the core gameplay change away from RPGs and into shooter land.  Heck in Halo I ger better guns that do more damage as the story progresses, my success still is not determined by the gun it is determined by my shooting skills. 

[spock06]

Ahglock wrote...

spock06 wrote...


But your success or failure in combat IS determined by your character just as much as your shooter skills.  If you dont level up any of your abilities good luck getting through some of the tough fights, especially on higher difficulty settings.  You keep saying ME2 has dropped the "core" of what makes an RPG...and as I keep asking what this "core" is, as well as stating what I feel it is (characters, story, player choice, dialogue) I am told that this has been said to me 5 times and I should shut up.  Yet looking through this thread I cannot find anywhere where you have said what you feel the core of a RPG is?  Statistic based gameplay? I am not trying to be offending I just want a straight answer.

Okay here is the 6th time then.:happy:   Gameplay is
usually determined in part by statistics attached to each character.

And in ME2 I'd say very little is determined by my stats, virtually everything is detemrined by my shooter skills.  If I upgrade my guns yeah they do more damage, if I max out inferno ammo yes it does more damage.  But all of my success is determined by my shooting skills, once that success happens I might have a bit of bonus damage due to my stats, but the suceess of the shooting was entirely determined by me.  That is the core gameplay change away from RPGs and into shooter land.  Heck in Halo I ger better guns that do more damage as the story progresses, my success still is not determined by the gun it is determined by my shooting skills. 

Gameplay is 
usually determined in part by statistics attached to each character.

[Sylvius the Mad]

spock06 wrote...

I think one would be hard pressed to argue that Deus Ex was not a real RPG.  So why not ME?

Dialogue system.

In Deus Ex you selected full lines of text.

As it happens, I would count ME as an RPG if you could disable the PC voice-over and just skip straight to the NPC's reaction to whatever Shepard said.  Simply removing the explicit delivery of the line would move ME back into the RPG camp for me.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 01 février 2010 - 11:54 .

[LolaRuns]

And in ME2 I'd say very little is determined by my stats, virtually everything is detemrined by my shooter skills. If I upgrade my guns yeah they do more damage, if I max out inferno ammo yes it does more damage.

But don't you know, shooters don't have weapon upgrades or ammo. Oh wait, they do. If you make your way through Doom with only the very first weapon you find you likely will also find it hard to survive. Same holds probably true for any modern shooter if you never upgrade your weapons.

I hear you, in games like Halo the story is not the focal point. The game doesn't revolve around the story, the story is merely an excuse for addictive action gameplay. Whereas in an RPG, the gameplay generally takes second place to the story and characters. I like ME2 because I think it has struck a near perfect balance between the two, but I would still consider it an RPG first and foremost.

I never played Halo but I have heard good things about the story. Isn't Halo the ones that has several books released? I heard that it has quite a ton of twists and turns and alien game characters that change sides, etc. I really don't think that it's fair to say that action based games mean that the story isn't in the foreground. Again Legend of Zelda, Assassin's Creed, Prince of Persia, Uncharted.

As for poor story being an excuse for addictive gameplay, well don't about have that in A LOT in various run by the mill RPGs? Where the story is by the numbers and the real appeal is addictive dungeon crawling, looting and/or leveling?

It seems that the category you'd be looking for would be storybased games or storyfocused games. But to me you can get good story out of some action games or even some strategy games and yes RPG games too. But there are plenty of unimaginative RPGs that were produced and plenty of RPGs where the main focus is on creating creative loot or addictive gameplay with the story just being an excuse (Diablo, Sacred come to mind...). A game that is obsessed with only fiddling with game mechanic and completely forgetting story about it would be a poor RPG, but it would still be an RPG.

IMO I love storybased games. Whether it's adventure games (whether you have next to no control) or RPGs or good action story games. The game mechanic you choose to implement the story is not important to how you tell the story. Heck you can even have storybased puzzle games these days. IMO RPG is mostly a game mechanic, storybased is an attribute or respectively a game philosophy. And choice is a good way to make storybased even more fascinating and better. But I wouldn't necessarily consider it something unique to RPGs.

Modifié par LolaRuns, 02 février 2010 - 12:00 .

[7a7ec]

I cant belive that they removed so many rpg elements of the game, even leveling up is to simplified,

This game doesn`t feel lika an rpg anymore, picking your armor, weapons, buying upgrades it all feels so generic ....



The invetory system in me 1 was mostly bad you were getting to many stuff all the time and was annoying selling it or convrting it to omni-gel but not having a invetory system is far worse .... Now you cant even see the stats of your weapons and thers only like 3 of them ....



Dont get me wrong I love the game but they really dumbed down the rpg elements of it

[Sylvius the Mad]

7a7ec wrote...

The invetory system in me 1 was mostly bad

BioWare hasn't designed a decent inventory system since NWN.

[sleepforever]

7a7ec wrote...


I cant belive that they removed so many rpg elements of the game, even leveling up is to simplified,
This game doesn`t feel lika an rpg anymore, picking your armor, weapons, buying upgrades it all feels so generic ....

The invetory system in me 1 was mostly bad you were getting to many stuff all the time and was annoying selling it or convrting it to omni-gel but not having a invetory system is far worse .... Now you cant even see the stats of your weapons and thers only like 3 of them ....

Dont get me wrong I love the game but they really dumbed down the rpg elements of it

+ 1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! thats what i try to explain alllllllllll this time!!

[Eldertech]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Eldertech wrote...
People love to complain man.. lol its the law of the gaming jungle.

Some of us are not complaining, and only arguing the semantics of the label.

I meant no offense    I should have worded that better..  many people have different mind sets as to what an RPG should be.
I see them all as RPG's just in different catagories is what i meant.
I look at all the positive aspects of a game like this and if it involves character creation and your actions directly effect every situation then to me its and RPG.
But again there are action RPG's, FPS/RPG's, and regular Fantasy RPG's.  i still see in the characters of ME2  a rogue,tank,wizard  etc  just under different names and controlling the party in a different way. but your still controlling thier gear, weapons, armor  etc and actions.
just my opinion.

[LolaRuns]

Maybe one could compare the situation to a strategy game vs. a tower defense/tower attack game. One potentially being something that evolved from the other due to steamlining maybe in part due to different input mechanics of consoles that make number crunching too complicated.

[Damian Magecraft]

spock06 wrote...

Ahglock wrote...

spock06 wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

spock06 wrote...
Explain.

I've already explained it to you. Like five times, by now. Are you just not listening, or just completely disregarding it?

You haven't explained anything.  You continue to refer to the genre and history of RPGs, yet when I argue your point your ignore it or make strawman claims such as "This is untrue."  "WoW is a bad RPG."  WHY WoW a bad RPG?  According to all the criteria you have given, it should be an excellent RPG?  

Meeting criteria does not make something good.  It has been explained to you by multiple people but you seem hell bent on disregarding it.  Given how this thread started out with insults it is not a surprise. 

I'm not hell bent on disregarding anything.  All I want is a reasonable explanation as to why an RPG must fit into the D&D molding, which is what I feel has been implied by the one and others, although they have not explictly said so.  I have not insulted anyone who has not insulted me.  I simply feel as though RPGs do not have to be confined into a specific box, anything outside of the box being labeled as a "only halfway RPG" and mocked by the "purists".  Personally, we can debate this all we want, but BioWare undoubtedly knows more about RPGs than any of us and they are the ones making the games so this is all pointless.  It is a good way to waste time at work though

If you belive that then you obviously have not looked at D&D recently...
D&D is all about the numbers now. Thats not ROLE playing thats ROLL playing.
Which saddly is all a VGRPG can give us at the current level of tech.
WOW is the worst kind of RPG its all about min/maxing the build for the best DPS.
RPGs should not be about DPS, Tanking ability, and crowd control (thats more for the RTS style games IMO).
They should be about story, characterization, and (yes, to a degree) customization. Unfortunately most folks seem to be under the impression that customization means long rank bars for tons of skills where a single rank increase has a negligable effect on game play. These same people also seem to belive that customization is the end all be all of an RPG experience.
As a Table Top RPGer since the days before console and computer gaming I can say that this is not a new belief it has been around from the beginning of RPGs.

[Moorihand]

Everyone here has an opinion...and u all know what they say about those right

Look the fact of the matter is that ME2 is VERYdifferent from ME1 and i think that is what most people here r arguing. Whether or not what ur opinion of what an RPG is doesn't matter to be completely honest with all of u. Like some others have stated previously an RPG is different things to different people. I myslef believe in the old school RPGs like BG1 & 2. Now i love this game, but it has its flaws. To be fair to Bioware they never advertised ME2 as a RPG, which they did to ME1. Am i happy about that? No, i don't think many fans of ME1 r happy about that fact either. If Bioware wanted to test out a new genre thewy should have done so with an original IP and not an established franchise. But, again, that is merely my opinion of this issue. I will continue to play and enjoy the game just like so many others and can;t wait for ME3.

As a side note...to all u peeps who want ur opinions to be heard on thism forum...it would be a good idea to register ur game so that all us other players know for a fact u r commenting on ur own personal experiences with it and not just blowing smoke up our ***es...or agreeing with ur friends or whatnot who actually have played the game. Trolling does come to mind witrh many posts i have seen on this forum and that is unfortunate.

Just my 2 cents anyway...not that its even worth that much lol.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Formal definitions never change.

Definitions do become archaic. If someone used "egregious" to mean "distinguished," any competent copy editor would correct him.  I suppose it's good we don't forget obsolete usages altogether, but current usage is what counts.

I deem them incorrect.  Similarly, I oppose ending a sentence with a preposition.

"I deem them incorrect"? Not "they are incorrect"? You've kind of given the game away there.

As for prepositions, I'm with that Churchill (mis)quote, which I'm sure you don't need repeated.

Modifié par AlanC9, 02 février 2010 - 12:58 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

"I deem them incorrect"? Not "they are incorrect"? You've kind of given the game away there.

One does not preclude the other.

[Bootsykk]

I want my loot!

It offered so much customization, what, with all the pretty colors you could choose from!

And there were so many stats! Wow-ee!


... um. Yeah.

I personally am very glad that I don't have to constantly fly to the citadel to go spam-happy-selling on the Hanaar vendor.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

"I deem them incorrect"? Not "they are incorrect"? You've kind of given the game away there.

One does not preclude the other.

If you thought the latter position was defensible, you'd be defending it.

Edit: yes, I wasn't taking you seriously.

Modifié par AlanC9, 02 février 2010 - 01:15 .

[LolaRuns]

but current usage is what counts.

Sure, but can you honestly say that the idea of RPG meaning some vague idea about story and decisions is the current dominant usage (honestly, common world common usage of "role playing" for most people is about neither one of our definitions but about doing kinky stuff in bed)? A good way for words to be archaic is if the thing they describe is long gone. But obviously here the thing that was traditionally denoted by the term rpg is still around and the term rpg is still used to describe it. You can call it "real" rpg or "traditional" rpg or "old" rpg but it's still there and it still needs some sort of name.

IMO there are better more on point ways to describe a game like ME2 than RPG does. Just because for example you liked RPGs in the past and now you really love ME2 and hence see an emotional progression based on your own emotional experience doesn't necessarily mean that RPG is the correct way to describe it. It's true that the D&D standards are old and nerdy but isn't this vision of the perfect "true" role playing experience of slipping into somebody and affecting the world just as fringe and nerdy?

It seems that if you go by immersion or decision making then the true siblings of ME2 would be GTA and Infamous/Prototype, not BG.

Modifié par LolaRuns, 02 février 2010 - 01:13 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

If you thought the latter position was defensible, you'd be defending it.

That's an unreasonable jump.

Rules of grammar are largely arbitrary.  There's no defense available.

[AeroCmdr]

Juneya wrote...

I want my loot!

It offered so much customization, what, with all the pretty colors you could choose from!

And there were so many stats! Wow-ee!


... um. Yeah.

I personally am very glad that I don't have to constantly fly to the citadel to go spam-happy-selling on the Hanaar vendor.

Why wouldn't you just sell to the nice Alliance Requisition Officer in the cargo hold?

[Kusy]

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

If you thought the latter position was defensible, you'd be defending it.

That's an unreasonable jump.

Rules of grammar are largely arbitrary.  There's no defense available.

Unreasonable? No, eminently reasonable. If grammar rules weren't arbitrary, I feel pretty confident that you would personally adopt the correct rules and defend them against all comers. But they are, so you don't. Unless I've badly misjudged you, which is quite possible.

An individual or group can deem a grammar rule valid or not, but there's no way to prove that a grammar rule is true. As with rules, so with definitions. "RPG" means whatever it's used to mean.

[Veex]

AeroCmdr wrote...

]Why wouldn't you just sell to the nice Alliance Requisition Officer in the cargo hold?

Because sitting at 999,999,999 credits makes selling stuff obsolete about halfway through the game.

[whiteraider]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

ROLL playing at it finest currently!

Almost as many dice needed as Tunnels & Trolls!

[Mezinger]

spock06 wrote...

 I have a question for all those complaining that ME2 is not a "real" RPG:  What is a REAL RPG?

Is it being able to loot a lot of items that are mostly useless?
Is it having to sift through a ton of unnecessarily complicated interface menus?  (I probably spent the majority of my time playing Oblivion in one menu or another)
Is it having "lots of content" and an "open world"? (translation:  a million 'fetch' quests and the ability to have a lot of meaningless conversations with badly written and unimportant characters)

If thats what you think makes an RPG, than I guess ME2 isn't one.  However, if like me you think what really makes a good RPG is
A strong plot wherein the player feels as through they themselves are advancing it
Memorable, unique characters the player is actually interested in
A variety of locales the player can explore at his/her own pace

and most importantly
Fun gameplay

Than ME2 is a pretty good example of focusing on what MATTERS in an RPG and trying to make the actual gameplay as FUN as possible.

The game is not perfect.  It has flaws.  There are certain aspects of ME1 they canned which I feel just needed tweaking, not trashing.  Yet, it is FUN.  YOU are in control of the story, YOU influence the characters, and the gameplay, i.e. the combat, is on par with most shooters.  I don't understand all this QQing about ME2 not being a "real" RPG.  Define "real" RPG and I would be more inclined to listen, just just saying OMG THE INVENTORY IS GONE AND THERES NO LOOT ITS NOT AN RPG is childlike and missing the point.

A couple of things it's missing and or lacking compared to the first one:

Immersion: The "mission complete screens" the teleporting back to the ship, the excessive loading screens... little by little chip away at being immersed in the game and make it feel less like a continuous flowing epic story line that you are in control of and more like a episodic shooter with an overarching campaign with some nominal choice over which order you play these loosely coupled episodes in.

Meaningful Progression: Diss the loot system all you want but part of what it gave you in addition to the ME1 skills system was meaningful progression. For example beginning of the game you couldn't snipe a Geth trooper at any distance by the end of the game you could take out many enemies from a distance... this is just an example but there's many others... meaningful progression has been deprecated big time in ME2

Deep Dialogue: In ME1 pretty much anytime you wanted to talk to someone they had something meaningful to say... even reports on the news to "mining colony gone missing" usually had some tie in to actual game events... Now often I go to talk to my squadmates on the Normandy and it's "Not now Shepard" and I get emails from old friends on the Citadel "come by and see me..." and I can't because there is no way to do so upon docking at the Citadel

Honestly I think you could write a Phd thesis on the design changes and their impacts to that certain je ne sais quoi that made it a "real" RPG...

Agreed that it still has a decent story and you still get to make some choices but for many of us that doesn't make an RPG. 

Modifié par Mezinger, 02 février 2010 - 02:19 .

[Elvhen Veluthil]

To the OP and all those that says ME2 is and RPG, do you find it so insulting to accept that ME2 is a great shooter with a great story? Bioshock and Halo are games that comes in mind, only that the story and the mood in ME2 is much more complicated, and you have a say to some things through conversation. Great games both of them, and after having played ME2 for a couple of hours, it seems like a great game too. Why do you insist that ME2 is a RPG? What, does that make you feel better, more sophisticated? Is it necessary to name it RPG for it to be a great game and you to be able to enjoy it?



And to all the Bioware fanboys out there, I bet Bioware/EA marketing team is dying to advertise ME2 as a shooter (gameplay-wise), they tried to present DAO as an action RPG after all. So stop thinking that you are doing Bioware a favor by writing one-lines (how old are those people by the way?) and offending the RPG folks that voice their opinion.