212 réponses à ce sujet

[Doug84]

Ekido wrote...

I said it once already and i say it again....
Inventorys, customization, tactical combat, etc... etc...
Does not define RPG

It seems like everyone has forgotten that there is actualy dialogue system in this game wich allows you to ROLEPLAY your character.

I know its useless to keep saying it since theres always these oldschool "RPG" players who think game isnt an RPG without items and stuff and no force in the universe can change their mind.

Agreed. No return to the god awful micromanagement of the inventory.

[DoggyDaddyX]

ME1 RPG inventory control was not great and quite annoying. That said, ME2 looks like it has cut some unnecessary stuff out...but didn't leave enough in customization (though I'm not done yet, so can't say totally). I guess I would call ME2 RPG-Lite. I would like to see ME3 go back the other way a little (more towards strategy/RPG). I can't even take my helmet off...dadgummit! What is the use of having great facial graphics and dialogue, Inferno, Cerberus and Blood Dragon armor, when I can't take the helmet off?



All that said, interrupts for paragon and renegade actions are awesome. It fits in a RPG and gives you some control/choice, but remains fast-paced and cinematic. Yeah!

[lehphyro2]

I agree with OP, my thoughts: http://social.biowar...3/index/1145181

[Bass of Spades]

Mass_Casualty wrote...

Thanks, in part, to EAs purchasing of the rights to the ME series, the original RPG heavy interface with an action-based combat system was thrown away.

EA had nothing to do with the improvements made to the game. Get over yourself and your e-peen issues.

Thread = Fail

Move along folks, stop feeding the trolls.

[wrdnshprd]

Ekido wrote...

I said it once already and i say it again....
Inventorys, customization, tactical combat, etc... etc...
Does not define RPG

It seems like everyone has forgotten that there is actualy dialogue system in this game wich allows you to ROLEPLAY your character.

I know its useless to keep saying it since theres always these oldschool "RPG" players who think game isnt an RPG without items and stuff and no force in the universe can change their mind.

and ill say for the billionth time.. that in a video game sense those attributes in bold do define what an rpg is. 

Why?  Well for one, in 2004 and before this thread wouldnt exist.  we had RPGs, we had shooters, we had platformers, etc.. there was no debate.

and second, simply adding a dialogue system and a good story to a game doesnt automatically mean that its an RPG.  if it did, then adding this kind of system to COD, Unreal Tournament, or Quake, would automatically put them in the RPG genre.

do things change.. well obviously yes they do.  and i am all for creating games like ME1, Deus EX, Diablo, Borderlands, etc.. these are all good definitions of HYBRIDS.. they blend more than one genre together and create a great experience.  also, this is where games are heading IMO.. this is a GOOD THING.  ME2 took way too much of one genre away.. plain and simple.  i dont understand why so many cant see that.

oh, and again for the billionth time.. If ME2 had done the opposite and added more min/maxing, character skill customization, loot, etc to the game, and took out the 3rd person Action combat -  the pro shooter crowd would be all up and arms as well.  lets not forget that.

[Terminus Pi]

Of course both are different. ME1 was made by Demiurge Studios(http://www.demiurgestudios.com/) on behalf of Bioware. The last thing they made was ME Pinnacle Station.

Each studio has it's own interpretation on how the game should be.

As for me, I liked playing both. A good ME3 would be one that combines the strongest points of both it's predecessors

[Bass of Spades]

wrdnshprd wrote...

Ekido wrote...

I said it once already and i say it again....
Inventorys, customization, tactical combat, etc... etc...
Does not define RPG

It seems like everyone has forgotten that there is actualy dialogue system in this game wich allows you to ROLEPLAY your character.

I know its useless to keep saying it since theres always these oldschool "RPG" players who think game isnt an RPG without items and stuff and no force in the universe can change their mind.

and ill say for the billionth time.. that in a video game sense those attributes in bold do define what an rpg is. 

No, they do not.

Look at Lost Odyssey, a very sparse "inventory" system, extremely limited customization, and a combat system that's most tactical moment, is choosing what part on a single, one-time only Tank boss I want to hit, and yet it's one of the biggest RPGs out there. Hmm, I wonder why? Is it the scale of the story and depth of characters coupled with the genre's iconic staple of character progression? Well no **** sherlock.

Modifié par Bass of Spades, 11 février 2010 - 10:07 .

[Nick Fox]

Dont understand why on earth a company known for their rpg's would intentionally alter a trilogy from one thing to another, other than to sell more to the "dumb masses". In a middle of a trilogy thats been adversitied as an rpg for that matter.....Its so incredible dumb that I dont even have words for it. Go and make your shooters if you want but I wont be on the bandwagon or be missled in the future, this trilogy stops here for me. That is if Bioware dont make the changes that I prefer. Sell it to another person, not me.



Shepard walks away into the sunset on a uncharted world with Wrex and Liara and doesnt look back.

[Schneidend]

There is no need to "bring back" what never left. ME1 is a shooter-RPG, and so is ME2. The only real difference aside from the altered inventory system is that the shooting mechanics in ME2 aren't awful. That's it.

[mattp420]

Terminus Pi wrote...

ME1 was made by Demiurge Studios(http://www.demiurgestudios.com/) on behalf of Bioware. The last thing they made was ME Pinnacle Station.

Demiurge Studios ported the Xbox 360 Mass Effect to PC.  They did not make Mass Effect.

[Doug84]

Bass of Spades wrote...

wrdnshprd wrote...

Ekido wrote...

I said it once already and i say it again....
Inventorys, customization, tactical combat, etc... etc...
Does not define RPG

It seems like everyone has forgotten that there is actualy dialogue system in this game wich allows you to ROLEPLAY your character.

I know its useless to keep saying it since theres always these oldschool "RPG" players who think game isnt an RPG without items and stuff and no force in the universe can change their mind.

and ill say for the billionth time.. that in a video game sense those attributes in bold do define what an rpg is. 

No, they do not.

Look at Lost Odyssey, a very sparse "inventory" system, extremely limited customization, and a combat system that's most tactical moment, is choosing what part on a single, one-time only Tank boss I want to hit, and yet it's one of the biggest RPGs out there. Hmm, I wonder why? Is it the scale of the story and depth of characters coupled with the genre's iconic staple of character progression? Well no **** sherlock.

Agreed. I'm sick and goddamn tired of these whiny folk who seem to think a game buried in endless unexplained stats is the only definition of RPG.

[Kroniker81]

Doug84 wrote...
Agreed. I'm sick and goddamn tired of these whiny folk who seem to think a game buried in endless unexplained stats is the only definition of RPG.

And I am sick and tired of people who like the dumbing down of games instead of real improvments to existing game features.

[Nick Fox]

Bass of Spades wrote...

wrdnshprd wrote...

Ekido wrote...

I said it once already and i say it again....
Inventorys, customization, tactical combat, etc... etc...
Does not define RPG

It seems like everyone has forgotten that there is actualy dialogue system in this game wich allows you to ROLEPLAY your character.

I know its useless to keep saying it since theres always these oldschool "RPG" players who think game isnt an RPG without items and stuff and no force in the universe can change their mind.

and ill say for the billionth time.. that in a video game sense those attributes in bold do define what an rpg is. 

No, they do not.

Look at Lost Odyssey, a very sparse "inventory" system, extremely limited customization, and a combat system that's most tactical moment, is choosing what part on a single, one-time only Tank boss I want to hit, and yet it's one of the biggest RPGs out there. Hmm, I wonder why? Is it the scale of the story and depth of characters coupled with the genre's iconic staple of character progression? Well no **** sherlock.

Not sure if you are deribitly lying or more missunderstood Lost odessy. sparse ??? Its different but in no way sparse, its based on the rings and diferent damages (Elemental or others). You create rings (Can have houndreds) buy and sell ingridients (for the rings), weapons (not so many but they are still in there and other accesorrys). Its a classic JPRPG in that regard with leveling and gear costumisation for the party. Not all that diferently from a western rgp other in how the fighting system works. Loot, xp and lvl's, in short a classic rpg if you want. Not my choice of the best out there, but you cant say its not about costumization, thats just isnt true my freind.
My brother still plays that one and is bothering me about it all the time. That little runt

[wrdnshprd]

Bass of Spades wrote...

wrdnshprd wrote...

Ekido wrote...

I said it once already and i say it again....
Inventorys, customization, tactical combat, etc... etc...
Does not define RPG

It seems like everyone has forgotten that there is actualy dialogue system in this game wich allows you to ROLEPLAY your character.

I know its useless to keep saying it since theres always these oldschool "RPG" players who think game isnt an RPG without items and stuff and no force in the universe can change their mind.

and ill say for the billionth time.. that in a video game sense those attributes in bold do define what an rpg is. 

No, they do not.

Look at Lost Odyssey, a very sparse "inventory" system, extremely limited customization, and a combat system that's most tactical moment, is choosing what part on a single, one-time only Tank boss I want to hit, and yet it's one of the biggest RPGs out there. Hmm, I wonder why? Is it the scale of the story and depth of characters coupled with the genre's iconic staple of character progression? Well no **** sherlock.

wow.. your using lost odysee as an example lol.. ok.. lets take a look at the inventory system you consider 'sparse':


There are three main parts to t he inventory so i have broken them up:

The Ring System

they had these magic rings that created a timing system, or ring system as the game wanted to call it.  basically you equipped this item in your inventory and if you timed your action correctly, a certain effect would occur.  what effect? well that depends on which of the thousands of rings you chose.. did you want poison? how about extra attack?  how bout better odds in stealing items from mobs? all kinds of stuff.

How did you get these items.. well you could by them from certain vendors, or you could.. craft them..

The Accessory System

 the 4 primary characters in Lost Odysee were immortal.  Really their are two ways these immortals learn skills, and one way is by equipping accessories.  Each accessory had a given skill.  this could be things like  white magic, black magic, shadow magic, extra attack skills, etc. 

What was even cooler about this was, you could customize your characters to be whatever you want.. you wanted black magic on the melee guy.. sure ok.. just link the black magic accessory to the melee character and as long as that accessory was equipped.. that character had the ability or stat boost. 

Also, the immortal could permantly learn the skill on the accessory after a certain period of time.  this was kept track by a point value on the item. These points were earned by the immortal after each combat, and once the point value was reached.. the immortal learned the skill on the accessory.

Now for weapons and Armor.

Granted, the asthetic look of the characters didnt change much, but there was a fair bit of weapons and armor you could get for the characters that changed the stats.. not to mention a couple of the characters had unique gear that you could get for them that gave them access to special abilities.  Even better, there were accessories that were required for some of the given armor and weapons.  the immortals could equip the accessory and learn the skill on that accessory that allowed them access to the wepon.. and poof, they now could use those said weapons.

yeah.. the inventory system was really 'sparse'

/sarcasm

Now lets take a look at the skill system.

Regarding the mortal characters, i will agree the skill system was pretty static.. However, as i mentioned there was more than one way an immortal could learn skills..

the second way they could learn skills was by skill link.  basically you chose a skill from one of the mortal characters and linked it to a mortal character.  As long as that mortal character was in the party with the immortal, the immortal character learned the link ability after a certain amount of battles.  this amount again was determined by a point value system.. after each battle, the immortal gained a certain amount of points to learning the skill.  once the immortal character reached the point value. they now knew the skill.

now, if the immortal character could use every skill they learned from an accessory or skill link, then yeah, there wouldnt be much customization or immersion.. thing is, they dont.. they have a set limit on the amount of skills that can be added.  you can increase this amount by finding items in the game world, but it is still a set amount.. thus you still had to have a strategy in mind when choosing said skills.

yeah, there was no customization at all in lost oddysee.. <_<

Modifié par wrdnshprd, 11 février 2010 - 11:11 .

[Tom Adama]

Tried playinng ME2 again on hardcore, I got bored just after I finished Omega. Sigh. I will be playing Aliens vs Predator demo until that game comes out; then Ill kill time until Heavy Rain makes an appearance.



This game lasted 4 days... wow, that was not worth the 2 year hype. Oh well. See ya guys in 2-3 years!

[wrdnshprd]

Bass of Spades wrote...

wrdnshprd wrote...

Ekido wrote...

I said it once already and i say it again....
Inventorys, customization, tactical combat, etc... etc...
Does not define RPG

It seems like everyone has forgotten that there is actualy dialogue system in this game wich allows you to ROLEPLAY your character.

I know its useless to keep saying it since theres always these oldschool "RPG" players who think game isnt an RPG without items and stuff and no force in the universe can change their mind.

and ill say for the billionth time.. that in a video game sense those attributes in bold do define what an rpg is. 

No, they do not.

Look at Lost Odyssey, a very sparse "inventory" system, extremely limited customization, and a combat system that's most tactical moment, is choosing what part on a single, one-time only Tank boss I want to hit, and yet it's one of the biggest RPGs out there. Hmm, I wonder why? Is it the scale of the story and depth of characters coupled with the genre's iconic staple of character progression? Well no **** sherlock.

also.. way to completely dodge the other part of the debate (see the post you quoted if you wonder what i mean).

[Paperghost]

Nick Fox wrote...

Dont understand why on earth a company known for their rpg's would intentionally alter a trilogy from one thing to another, other than to sell more to the "dumb masses".

just because a company is known for their rpgs doesn't mean they're restricted to making just that for the rest of their days. i'm frankly baffled that a handful of sorely needed removals from the original game seemingly have such a gigantic impact on people.

Nick Fox wrote...

In a middle of a trilogy thats been adversitied as an rpg for that
matter.....

Huh, this again. Once again, nowhere on the game box, disc or manual for either title does it say anything about mass effect being an rpg. additionally, I don't recall a single advert, trailer or magazine advert calling the game an rpg - the only references I can find *anywhere* are quotes from magazines calling it "rpg of the year", or a solitary page on the ME1 hub refering to some utterly generic "role playing aspects" that could apply to probably 99% of every game ever made.

please show us where the product claims to be an RPG? i think my copy of the game must be defective.

man, people round these parts really like fetch quests, endless empty space, pointless inventory juggling and generic mako missions don't they? who could have predicted removing the worst parts of the original game would be taken so badly?

also: endless sweeping statements in this thread (and others) about the "dumb masses". I find the changes made to the game a huge improvement, and enjoyed almost every aspect of it apart from scanning and the inability to change armour outside of your cabin. Am I dumb? If so, someone better go deface the wikipedia page about me with some sort of "herp derp likes teh shooters" comment. I'll survive, given something like 80% of my time in the original game was also spent shooting things.

[MassEffect762]

The house is divided, that alone tells me quite a lot about ME2.

[FlashedMyDrive]

MassEffect762 wrote...

The house is divided, that alone tells me quite a lot about ME2.

I would say divided, but far from 50/50.

Most people enjoyed Me2 for the most part, it's normally only the over-zealous, nostolgic players that constantly complain, "ME2 sucks soooo bad".

Modifié par FlashedMyDrive, 12 février 2010 - 12:10 .

[FlashedMyDrive]

I'm about 8 hours in ME1 and all I can say is that it's feeling more like work than play. Mass Effect 1 is good and all, but the side quests are just so tedious and A to B fetch missions.


I've played Me1 about 7 times and Me2 about 3. All I can say, Me2 feels a lot more replayable.

Modifié par FlashedMyDrive, 12 février 2010 - 12:12 .

[uhlbeck]

I played ME1 for several months, the character I ported into ME2 I played for over 160 hours game time. and there were several others almost as long.

I agree with you very much. ME2 is to much like Modern Warfare. It is just a shooter with a little RPG.

ME 1 with the story line and content of ME2 would have been great, I might play ME2 a couple of time more but  I think I will go back to ME1

[Canez fan 1988]

uhlbeck wrote...

I played ME1 for several months, the character I ported into ME2 I played for over 160 hours game time. and there were several others almost as long.

I agree with you very much. ME2 is to much like Modern Warfare. It is just a shooter with a little RPG.

ME 1 with the story line and content of ME2 would have been great, I might play ME2 a couple of time more but  I think I will go back to ME1

Seriously? I didn't know you could call in airstrikes and play in the first person when playing ME2. Must have missed that in the 50+ hours I logged in my 1st playthrough.

[Sibbwolf]

wrdnshprd wrote...

Bass of Spades wrote...

wrdnshprd wrote...

Ekido wrote...

I said it once already and i say it again....
Inventorys, customization, tactical combat, etc... etc...
Does not define RPG

It seems like everyone has forgotten that there is actualy dialogue system in this game wich allows you to ROLEPLAY your character.

I know its useless to keep saying it since theres always these oldschool "RPG" players who think game isnt an RPG without items and stuff and no force in the universe can change their mind.

and ill say for the billionth time.. that in a video game sense those attributes in bold do define what an rpg is. 

No, they do not.

Look at Lost Odyssey, a very sparse "inventory" system, extremely limited customization, and a combat system that's most tactical moment, is choosing what part on a single, one-time only Tank boss I want to hit, and yet it's one of the biggest RPGs out there. Hmm, I wonder why? Is it the scale of the story and depth of characters coupled with the genre's iconic staple of character progression? Well no **** sherlock.

also.. way to completely dodge the other part of the debate (see the post you quoted if you wonder what i mean).

Inventory not so much. Usually the inventory is a means to an end for customisation. Tactical combat, sure.

[Nick Fox]

MassEffect762 wrote...

The house is divided, that alone tells me quite a lot about ME2.

Thats an understatement, more a bloody civil war going on. Cant imagine Bioware didnt see this comming, I say let it rip on em and hard as it possible can.

[AlanC9]

MassEffect762 wrote...

The house is divided, that alone tells me quite a lot about ME2.

You think this is bad? You should have been around when NWN1 launched. Now that was a civil war. Which didn't stop NWN1 from being a success.