183 réponses à ce sujet

[Aratar Amero]

MassEffect762 wrote...

Aratar Amero wrote...

Like i said, I am perfectly fine and happy with people having issue with the game and complaining that the customization and inventory and loot and all that arnt upto the standard that they were at in ME1 as long as they complain about it upfront as its own issue, saying that a game sucks as an RPG cause people arnt crapping out loot once you kill them or because you cant force a squadmate to wear the armor you want them to, i feel isnt a valid argument as they arnt nessicary to make a good rpg, both systems are infact present ME2, just not as much as in ME1. All people need to do is say i dont like the game cause of the customizing, done, simple, the point holds and its infact accurate, but once they start trying to bring it into the point where they are saying it destroys the whole feel of an rpg well i think they are missing the point of what an rpg is.

but once they start trying to bring it into the point where they are
saying it destroys the whole feel of an rpg well i think they are
missing the point of what an rpg is.

I don't think they mean rpgs as a whole but simply  Mass Effects "soul". It's all opinion.

They're whining because they strongly believe in those elements and if they don't all bioware will have to read about is how awesome ME2  was from the "cinematic story telling/ shooter crowd". That would be a disservice.

I have no problem with the people saying that, but alot of people are really pushing it saying that it destroys everything and thats who my post was directed at, people who think an rpg is spending a few hours a day managing an equipment screen and without that the game is nothing but fail, and believe me there are alot of people saying that.

Modifié par Aratar Amero, 06 février 2010 - 06:10 .

[Geohound08]

Would it be nice if our biotic or tech power ability has seperate cooldown?

[Orogenic]

Legitimate criticism is not hate.. nor is it trolling.



I'm just sayin.

[Taimae]

I'd say that enjoyed games about equally. There were things that I loved/liked/disliked in both games. I tend to play the ME games as a 3rd person shooter moreso than an RPG, so whatever 'elements' were taken out didn't have me complain to much. They may have changed a bit, but they won me over in the end. Not a big deal for me since the actual combat remained almost the same.



The tedious micromanaging system was replaced with tedious planet scanning. Talk about long...

[MassEffect762]

Aratar Amero wrote...

Aratar Amero wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

Like i said, I am perfectly fine and happy with people having issue with the game and complaining that the customization and inventory and loot and all that arnt upto the standard that they were at in ME1 as long as they complain about it upfront as its own issue, saying that a game sucks as an RPG cause people arnt crapping out loot once you kill them or because you cant force a squadmate to wear the armor you want them to, i feel isnt a valid argument as they arnt nessicary to make a good rpg, both systems are infact present ME2, just not as much as in ME1. All people need to do is say i dont like the game cause of the customizing, done, simple, the point holds and its infact accurate, but once they start trying to bring it into the point where they are saying it destroys the whole feel of an rpg well i think they are missing the point of what an rpg is.

but once they start trying to bring it into the point where they are
saying it destroys the whole feel of an rpg well i think they are
missing the point of what an rpg is.

I don't think they mean rpgs as a whole but simply  Mass Effects "soul". It's all opinion.

They're whining because they strongly believe in those elements and if they don't all bioware will have to read about is how awesome ME2  was from the "cinematic story telling/ shooter crowd". That would be a disservice.

I have no problem with the people saying that, but alot of people are really pushing it saying that it destroys everything and thats who my post was directed at, people who think an rpg is spending a few hours a day managing an equipment screen and without that the game is nothing but fail, and believe me there are alot of people saying that.

It destroys everthing for them perhaps, believe me I bought in to all the hype and was waiting over two years for something specatular, day comes and I'm not feeling it. I like ME2 but it's not what I expected as a whole. It's that passion on both sides that is driving this agrument. Good, bad and ugly.

I see way more people rabidly defending ME2 almost blindly and I think "who the heck are these people?".  I'm sure the other side sees it much the same way.

I'm more curios as to what bioware will make of all this "commotion".

[Aratar Amero]

what i'm seeing will happen is probably a lot of DLC with a whole lot of new armor and weapons, probably some more custom appearances for squad mates too to give more of a feel of character customization. this seems like the neutral way to make both parties happy as it doesn't change the current system which one side loves, and gives more items and a feeling of greater control on the game for the other side that feels lacking.

Modifié par Aratar Amero, 06 février 2010 - 06:25 .

[lessthanjake9]

A lot of the RPG elements ARE gone, but people overstate it. They confuse RPG elements and elements that many RPGs have.

Getting stuff off of dead bodies is not an RPG element. It is annoying, time-wasting, and unimmersive. And most importantly, who REALLY runs around a room they just cleared out taking stuff from dead bodies when there are people who want to kill you in the next room? No one. Thus, its not role playing.

The MAKO was not roleplaying. It was an idea that ended up not working that well.

Overheating weapons was not roleplaying. It was simply a gameplay mechanism that Bioware decided to move away from.

Being able to switch items in the middle of a level is all well and good, but its not actually realistic because no one can really carry a bunch of armor sets around with them. Is it something that is in many rpgs? Yes. But is it realistic? No. And if its not realistic, it shouldnt be obligatory for an RPG.


With that said, they DID move away from RPG elements in a few ways:

1. There's not really choices of items. Each weapon type involves like 3 options, and they aren't really different. Rather there are simply the worst, the middle, and the best ones of each weapon. There really arent armor choices either. You got some stuff for preordering, but basically you just have a like 3-5 options for for helmet, legs, arms, and body. And all of the options provide basically marginal benefit and won't change how you play.

2. There are less powers. Now, this was done for a valid reason, which is that they wanted it to be easier to use powers without pausing on consoles. However, the result is simply that there is much less in the way of customization of how you progress your character. It still exists, but honestly I think it would be hard to play as the same class twice and have a different combat experience, which isnt true of ME1.


At the same time they strengthened some RPG elements:

1. You can choose how you look in your armor. So you might not be able to pick much in terms of items, but you will be able to personalize your look, which is nice.

2. The defenses system (ie. barrier/shield/armor/health) makes teamwork and tactics in combat more necessary.

3. There is more reason to have a relationship with your teammates since the main story involves gaining their trust and loyalty. In ME1 and many other RPGs, helping teammates with their issues feels like wasting time when you have the a major main quest to deal with. Making that part of the main quest makes character interaction play a more central role, which is a big RPG thing.

[MoonChildTheUnholy]

lessthanjake9 wrote...


Being able to switch items in the middle of a level is all well and good, but its not actually realistic because no one can really carry a bunch of armor sets around with them. Is it something that is in many rpgs? Yes. But is it realistic? No. And if its not realistic, it shouldnt be obligatory for an RPG.

if we are going realistic then why is it that an elite team has no armor to wear? Garrus has a damaged armor for the entire game, the squad in the Normandy is always doing the same thing for the entire game in their own private spot, i can´t crouch in a game that has elevated shooter mechanics, using armor with no helmet toggle on conversations and still npc knows its Shepard, and so on.. thats realistic? 

The inventory is not obligatory no, but think about it, we don´t need to carry items, they could be reproduced like they already are on the Normandy, but where are they besides a single weapon or scan for the same upgrades?
We have more heavy weapons than pistols now, we find ONE smg, and when other weapons are found they make us choose ONE like in the colector ship, the rpg side of this is very weak yes and no one can deny it.