207 réponses à ce sujet

[nicodeemus327]

Hizoka003 wrote...

people want everything spoon fed to them now... RPGs are not made for the typical retarded gamer... yet thats what people seem to want... they want something simple and easy that even a person who look up to forrest gump can understand... if you want that play Halo... i want an RPG i don't want something that can be easily done in a weekend

There's was nothing hard about ME 1 (or any RPG for that matter). However there was plenty of annoying. The inventory and equipment system was terrible. Spending 20 mins refitting your squad and selling equipment for  minor stat improvments was worthless.

Also, I finished ME 1 this weekend. It was easy and took less time to rush through then ME 2 did.

[Hizoka003]

exactly... i want games like they used to make... a "rush" run was still 30+ hours... but the typical retarded gamer of today is not able to play a game like that anyone... they want instant gradification... if they cannot beat a game in one to 2 sittings its too long for them

[nicodeemus327]

I will agree with the overall idea of more RPG but only a little. Take the armor customization system and give us some more options then expand it to the whole crew. I think that's really the only thing that needs to be done to make it more RPG-like.

[MPaBkaTa123]

Hizoka003 is a troll. He may have the game but every single one of his posts are rants about how RPGs are about nothing more than loot, his complaints contradict themselves and as a whole just adds nothing constructive in this thread. Not that i am by saying this but hey i'm writing something less trolltastic below.



Otherwise i have to agree with a few things mainly that ME2 sidequests although different than Sidequest Planet #47837709 aren't really that much better due to near total lack of dialogue.Also as someone above said while the ME2 guns are diverse most of them suck and you will only use one of each all the time except with heavy weps.

[nicodeemus327]

Hizoka003 wrote...

exactly... i want games like they used to make... a "rush" run was still 30+ hours... but the typical retarded gamer of today is not able to play a game like that anyone... they want instant gradification... if they cannot beat a game in one to 2 sittings its too long for them

The best choice is for a game to have both. You can rush though quickly consuming the main story elements or do everything. However increasing game play artificially isn't good either. Like the UNC collection side quests in ME 1 added a ton of time. However they were annoying and boring.

[Few87]

All i want is to be able to buy more clothes and choose to wear them instead of armour in peacefull locations.

[Hizoka003]

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

Hizoka003 is a troll. He may have the game but every single one of his posts are rants about how RPGs are about nothing more than loot, his complaints contradict themselves and as a whole just adds nothing constructive in this thread. Not that i am by saying this but hey i'm writing something less trolltastic below.

Otherwise i have to agree with a few things mainly that ME2 sidequests although different than Sidequest Planet #47837709 aren't really that much better due to near total lack of dialogue.Also as someone above said while the ME2 guns are diverse most of them suck and you will only use one of each all the time except with heavy weps.

no where have i said loot=RPG becasue only a retard like you would think of something like that...

the people who think ME2 was fine are shooter fans not RPG fans... the only RPG element of ME2 was the fact it had dialog.. ME2 was a dissapointment to RPG fan... but to mindless shooter fans it was great... its just a shame that mindless shooter fans are too stupid to know what a great game ME2 could of been

[BLY78NOR]

Hizoka003 wrote...

exactly... i want games like they used to make... a "rush" run was still 30+ hours... but the typical retarded gamer of today is not able to play a game like that anyone... they want instant gradification... if they cannot beat a game in one to 2 sittings its too long for them

What's more retarded here, people who are willing to accept things for what they are or you, the person who rather then spending your time on something you actually do like come here to whine about a game never intended to be that not being that?



Loot and grinding and michromanaging 27 kinds of identical armor is somehow less retarded then wanting a game you don't need a speardsheet to play, you know something fun...

Modifié par BLY78NOR, 08 février 2010 - 05:06 .

[nicodeemus327]

The dialog options and choices are the real role play. The rest is just a way to emulate combat.

[MPaBkaTa123]

I will ignore the part about me being a retard since i called you a troll so its justified.



Otherwise why do you believe all people who enjoy the improved shooter aspect ( it was there in ME2 as well just less so) are mindless. Just tell me what could have been done to make the game great in your eyes.

[haberman13]

/signed

[Doug84]

Draconis6666 wrote...

Could you explain to me why you think you lost "customization" when all you had in ME 1 was 20 guns that used one of two models and had no reason to use any of them but specter X once you got it or 20 armors that are all useless that basicaly used the same armor model in different colors and 3 that actualy have stats worth using which still used the same model with different colors? If your talking about the characters themselves i guess i can sort of see your point but even then aside from characters created with bonus skills you had enough skill points to max 80% of your skills.

I'm sure this comes off as kind of a "lol ur dumb" post but thats not the intention i'm honestly trying to understand why some people think that lots of choices of the same thing equals more customization.


Edit: I should point out I'm not disagreeing with you there is a fundamental lack of alot of RPG elements in Mass 2 and ME 3 really should have more I just dont understand how people think customization has gotten worse from ME 1

Agreed - I don't get why people want the old armour and inventory system back to be honest - it was a micromanagement hell. And RPG == Role-Playing Game, not stat based game - alot of people seem to think "Stat based combat == RPG".

[Doug84]

nicodeemus327 wrote...

The dialog options and choices are the real role play. The rest is just a way to emulate combat.

You hit the nail on the head so hard its gone into my leg. Ouch!

[WillieStyle]

Hizoka003 wrote...

people want everything spoon fed to them now... RPGs are not made for the typical retarded gamer... yet thats what people seem to want... they want something simple and easy that even a person who look up to forrest gump can understand... if you want that play Halo... i want an RPG i don't want something that can be easily done in a weekend

Pro-tip: If you're going to call others "retarded," learn to write properly.
As a service to you and other semi-literate "RPG fans" out there, I will now translate the above quote into English.

People want everything spoon fed to them now.  RPGs are not made for the typical retarded gamer.  Yet, that's what people seem to want.  They want something so simple and easy that even a person who looks up to Forrest Gump could understand it.  If you want that, play Halo.  I want an RPG. I don't want something that can easily be done in a weekend.

P.S.
Ellipses aren't periods.

[nicodeemus327]

Doug84 wrote...

Draconis6666 wrote...

Could you explain to me why you think you lost "customization" when all you had in ME 1 was 20 guns that used one of two models and had no reason to use any of them but specter X once you got it or 20 armors that are all useless that basicaly used the same armor model in different colors and 3 that actualy have stats worth using which still used the same model with different colors? If your talking about the characters themselves i guess i can sort of see your point but even then aside from characters created with bonus skills you had enough skill points to max 80% of your skills.

I'm sure this comes off as kind of a "lol ur dumb" post but thats not the intention i'm honestly trying to understand why some people think that lots of choices of the same thing equals more customization.


Edit: I should point out I'm not disagreeing with you there is a fundamental lack of alot of RPG elements in Mass 2 and ME 3 really should have more I just dont understand how people think customization has gotten worse from ME 1

Agreed - I don't get why people want the old armour and inventory system back to be honest - it was a micromanagement hell. And RPG == Role-Playing Game, not stat based game - alot of people seem to think "Stat based combat == RPG".

You can thank JRPGs for that. I've actually done more role playing in this game then another I can think of.

[Schneidend]

Sorry to burst the proverbial bubble, but ME2 is a far deeper RPG than ME1, in my opinion. Using the Vindicator Battle Rifle versus using the Geth Pulse Rifle or Avenger is a choice. Using a Spectre X weapon versus any non-Spectre X is not. Likewise, deciding between the Aegis Vest and Shield Harness is a choice, while deciding between Colossus/PredatorH/M/L and anything else (though Mercenary is a close third) is not.

[Hizoka003]

people seem to forget that all RPGs came from D&D which had stats... people who do not want any kinda stats or inventory or anything want a shooter with dialog choices... not an RPG...

[Hizoka003]

Schneidend wrote...

Sorry to burst the proverbial bubble, but ME2 is a far deeper RPG than ME1, in my opinion. Using the Vindicator Battle Rifle versus using the Geth Pulse Rifle or Avenger is a choice. Using a Spectre X weapon versus any non-Spectre X is not. Likewise, deciding between the Aegis Vest and Shield Harness is a choice, while deciding between Colossus/PredatorH/M/L and anything else (though Mercenary is a close third) is not.

so chosing a differnt cosmetic that has next to 0 bearing on the game is a choice? you can complete the entire game on insantiy without ever changing your armor, but thats a huge choice...

[WillieStyle]

Hizoka003 wrote...

exactly... i want games like they used to make... a "rush" run was still 30+ hours... but the typical retarded gamer of today is not able to play a game like that anyone... they want instant gradification... if they cannot beat a game in one to 2 sittings its too long for them

Please stop doing this to my language. It's just mean.

Anyway, the reason games are shorter these days isn't because today's gamers demand instant gratification.  It's because, in modern games all dialogue is voiced and the 3d graphics are significantly more detailed.  This means that games take up more memory.  If you were to remake Baldur's Gate 2 with today's graphics and dialogue standards, the game would take up 5 DVDs and about 100 gigs of harddrive space.  That's obviously unacceptable.  That's the reason games are somewhat shorter than they used to be.  In exchange, we get great experiences like the awesome voice acting of Mordin in ME2.

[wrdnshprd]

here is something..



dragon age is how bioware defines an RPG



ME2 is how bioware defines a shooter with RPG elements.



For ME3, i want:



- armor customization for my squadmates like there currently is for shephard.

- more skills during level up

- more weapons - 3 weapons per weapon type (excluding heavy).. really?

- more upgrades

[MPaBkaTa123]

Hizoka003 wrote...

people seem to forget that all RPGs came from D&D which had stats... people who do not want any kinda stats or inventory or anything want a shooter with dialog choices... not an RPG...

That is true RPGs did come from D&D, however that does not mean that they can not change and adapt to new tastes. DAO for instance was a classic D&D esque RPG. Mass Effect merges two genres (ME2 more so), and in my opinion makes a better game then say NWN which is based on the D&D system.

P.S. Tell us what you think ME2 could have done to be a "True RPG" in your eyes.

P.P.S Stop using elipses to end your sentences.

[nicodeemus327]

WillieStyle wrote...

Hizoka003 wrote...

exactly... i want games like they used to make... a "rush" run was still 30+ hours... but the typical retarded gamer of today is not able to play a game like that anyone... they want instant gradification... if they cannot beat a game in one to 2 sittings its too long for them

Please stop doing this to my language. It's just mean.

Anyway, the reason games are shorter these days isn't because today's gamers demand instant gratification.  It's because, in modern games all dialogue is voiced and the 3d graphics are significantly more detailed.  This means that games take up more memory.  If you were to remake Baldur's Gate 2 with today's graphics and dialogue standards, the game would take up 5 DVDs and about 100 gigs of harddrive space.  That's obviously unacceptable.  That's the reason games are somewhat shorter than they used to be.  In exchange, we get great experiences like the awesome voice acting of Mordin in ME2.

Well said.

Imo this guy should read a book. That's what he wants. I suggest a Game of Thrones.

[nicodeemus327]

wrdnshprd wrote...

here is something..

dragon age is how bioware defines an RPG

ME2 is how bioware defines a shooter with RPG elements.

For ME3, i want:

- armor customization for my squadmates like there currently is for shephard.
- more skills during level up
- more weapons - 3 weapons per weapon type (excluding heavy).. really?
- more upgrades

I'll agree with number one. The rest, more doesn't equal better.

Modifié par nicodeemus327, 08 février 2010 - 05:21 .

[Hizoka003]

You honestly think a 20 hour game with spoken dialog is better then a 100 hour game with written dialog? Are you that lazy you cannot read a bit of dialog and picture it in your mind?

[nicodeemus327]

Hizoka003 wrote...

You honestly think a 20 hour game with spoken dialog is better then a 100 hour game with written dialog? Are you that lazy you cannot read a bit of dialog and picture it in your mind?

I do it all the time. They are called books. Try them out. You can choose which one you like better. However, I'll take both.