177 réponses à ce sujet

[Brianalot Curren]

I said before, I have played almost every single "RPG" over the last 12 years and I will consider this a full-fledged RPG. I hate to break it to some of the "RPG purists" but this is how the wind is blowing. Of course just because the wind is blowing one way doesn't mean you have to like it, but if you want to play new games you will have to get over it. The fact that ME2 is so widely commericially successfull and critically successfull means that most other RPG developers will make their RPGs like this in the future so better get used to it.



And you know what if you consider Role-Playing walking from area to area to complete 20 fed ex quests or "clear out this basement of rats and I will give you a reward" then by all means keep playing those games. But if you consider Role-playing to actually have a story where you can affect an outcome and actually have real consequences then ME2 is the game for you. If you think the story was weak that is not a reason for you to consider it not a RPG, not everyone that plays or watches or reads something will like the story.



The first hour of playing ME2 I thought I was going to dislike the whole inventory and simplified mechanics of the game. But to be honest, if the story is solid, I am allowed to invest more of my brain power to the story and not worrying about making sure my squad mates are wearing pants when they take on the geth. That is probably the main reason why I enjoyed the game so much.



Look everyones def of "fun" is going to be different. But I'm not in high school anymore, I dont have the energy to spend 30 hours a week playing games. When I come home from work I just want some simple fun. Most games these days are getting TOO complicated, I cant even play sports games anymore because the controls are way to intense for me. Call my a simpleton if you must, or call me a has-been RPG purist.



|RPG = good story| in my opinion.

[Brianalot Curren]

Daeion wrote...

honesty it gets harder and harder to define what a RPG is as time goes on as it means different things to different people. I mean compare a JRPG Like Final Fantasy to KOTOR, both are considered RPGs but have vastly different game play mechanics. Look at a game like Bioshock, I have friends that will argue it is a shooter based upon the main game play element and I have others who will argue it's a RPG because you can choose how to act i.e. saving vs. harvesting as well as the different combinations of plasmids, tonics, and upgrading them, weapons, and taking photos to increase damage vs enemy types.

+1

[Black Bizart]

Guys, ME2 is an adventure game. http://en.wikipedia..../Adventure_game



The medium of this adventure game is a third person shooter mixed with mini games and a conversation wheel. You make choices and there are minor variations in outcome based on your choices.

[Jean de Valette]

Bioware created BG1 and later BG2. That was the pinacle of their cRPG gamemaking ability apparently. Since then it has been one, long decline. It's painful to watch and has caused appologists like the OP to bend themselves backwards to excuse Bio.



ME2 is not a pure RPG and the OP knows it. You play a pre-defined character (just like the Witcher) with virtually no customization beyond the superficial (naughty-goody convo's, superficial class selection).



That said ME2 is a good game. But Bioware is the Neville Chamberlain of the computer industry. One long appeasement to the console masses. They "streamline" their games which basically is dumbing down.



We saw what happened to Chamberlain and how history has come to view that man. Hopefully Bioware won't end up the same.



Judging DA and ME2, all hope is lost that there ever will be a half decent western party-based cRPG coming from them.

[marshalleck]

Jean de Valette wrote...

Bioware created BG1 and later BG2. That was the pinacle of their cRPG gamemaking ability apparently. Since then it has been one, long decline. It's painful to watch and has caused appologists like the OP to bend themselves backwards to excuse Bio.

ME2 is not a pure RPG and the OP knows it. You play a pre-defined character (just like the Witcher) with virtually no customization beyond the superficial (naughty-goody convo's, superficial class selection).

That said ME2 is a good game. But Bioware is the Neville Chamberlain of the computer industry. One long appeasement to the console masses. They "streamline" their games which basically is dumbing down.

We saw what happened to Chamberlain and how history has come to view that man. Hopefully Bioware won't end up the same.

Judging DA and ME2, all hope is lost that there ever will be a half decent western party-based cRPG coming from them.

I hope someone tries to publish a new game built with mechanics from over a decade ago and fails horribly in the market, just so you whining purists will understand why nobody is trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to video games.

[Oawa]

bjdbwea wrote...

1. You have apparently never played ME 1. There you have even more and much more meaningful and far reaching decisions to make, which are usually also portrayed better than in ME 2.

2. Really, why are always those who don't really know RPGs so insistent they're playing one? I can only assume that to the younger audience the term sounds, like, cool. What's wrong with saying "I like shooter games with simple mechanics and a good story"? No harm done. But whatever, I don't really care if people want to call all their favourite games RPGs, I certainly won't argue endlessly why they're not, but it is odd that they spend so much time defending their (wrong) characterization of the game.

1. Of course the choices in Mass Effect 1 are going to seem more meaningful and far reaching, it's the beginning of the story, lol.  Any choices made in the next two games won't seem as far reaching because you get closer to the end.

2. Because there is no set in stone, ten commandments of what defines an RPG?  Any game that allows the player to make choices other than what weapon to use to kill someone, or which path to take to get to the same end is going to be compared or called an RPG because the player is given more freedom.

[Tamcia]

Baldurs gate was RPG.



ME2 - an awesome game, that is mostly combat, specifically shooter. It did feel like steps forward and backwards were made in comparison of ME and ME2 - some aspects of RPG were improved, some were downplayed.



I do miss the old "extremely" long games. While ME2 was larger then most of todays game, it has the "potential" of being even longer - wish ME3 was much longer, because it will be the end, so at least the end will be epic.

[Brianalot Curren]

marshalleck wrote...

Jean de Valette wrote...

Bioware created BG1 and later BG2. That was the pinacle of their cRPG gamemaking ability apparently. Since then it has been one, long decline. It's painful to watch and has caused appologists like the OP to bend themselves backwards to excuse Bio.

ME2 is not a pure RPG and the OP knows it. You play a pre-defined character (just like the Witcher) with virtually no customization beyond the superficial (naughty-goody convo's, superficial class selection).

That said ME2 is a good game. But Bioware is the Neville Chamberlain of the computer industry. One long appeasement to the console masses. They "streamline" their games which basically is dumbing down.

We saw what happened to Chamberlain and how history has come to view that man. Hopefully Bioware won't end up the same.

Judging DA and ME2, all hope is lost that there ever will be a half decent western party-based cRPG coming from them.

I hope someone tries to publish a new game built with mechanics from over a decade ago and fails horribly in the market, just so you whining purists will understand why nobody is trying to reinvent the wheel when it comes to video games.

+1.

If someone made an RPG like BGII now, no one would buy it and they wouldn't make any money.  Name the last "true" RPG made in the last little while.  Other than Oblivion or Fallout 3.  From what I hear fallout new vegas is going to be made for the console masses as you so bluntly put it.

"One long appeasment to console masses," bro, thats who pays the bills these days for game developers, get with the program.  You tailor to "the masses."  Thats life.  You can't compare a game developer to a british prime minister.  And the people who make history in 20 years when it comes to games will be the "console simpletons" you so easily disregard, not me or you.  I totally disagree, the games since BGII have become more refined.  Developers realize you don't have to throw the kitchen sink at us for us to enjoy a game.

ME2 = RPG = Great Story

Modifié par Brianalot Curren, 23 février 2010 - 07:38 .

[InTransit]

great post by the OP. Not a perfect game but a damn good one. This franchise is shaping up to be one of my all time favorites.

[Black Bizart]

Interestingly enough, appeasement, pre-Hitler, was considered a very good strategy. You figure out what your opponent wants and give them enough of it to make them avoid adopting their omega option. It's what would later be called, no pun intended, game theory. The reason it didn't work in the case of Hitler was because he was F@$*@*$ing insane. Consider how much better it would have been if we had followed an "appeasement" strategy with Iraq instead of invading, for instance.

So Bioware has accomodated players who found the weapons and armor of the original Mass Effect tedious. And it has streamlined in other ways as well. If that appeasement leads to more games with a strong storyline, hey, good job Bioware.

In other news, it's a computer game. Get a life, dude. Go back to Baldur's Gate 2 and Fallout 1. They were actually pretty linear games with few real choices. Baldur's Gate 2: Throne of Bhaal actually lampshaded this by having you play a minigame which is a text based adventure (the Warrior's Skull quest). ME2 is a TON more open than KoToR. KoToR is actually a disguised "collect the four gems" quest. Except instead of the four gems, it's the four planets you have to visit.

The only difference with ME2 is that they took away more of the veil. I could have done with a bit more depth but overall it's a fun romp.

Jean de Valette wrote...

Bioware created BG1 and later BG2. That was the pinacle of their cRPG gamemaking ability apparently. Since then it has been one, long decline. It's painful to watch and has caused appologists like the OP to bend themselves backwards to excuse Bio.

ME2 is not a pure RPG and the OP knows it. You play a pre-defined character (just like the Witcher) with virtually no customization beyond the superficial (naughty-goody convo's, superficial class selection).

That said ME2 is a good game. But Bioware is the Neville Chamberlain of the computer industry. One long appeasement to the console masses. They "streamline" their games which basically is dumbing down.

We saw what happened to Chamberlain and how history has come to view that man. Hopefully Bioware won't end up the same.

Judging DA and ME2, all hope is lost that there ever will be a half decent western party-based cRPG coming from them.

Modifié par Black Bizart, 23 février 2010 - 07:39 .

[Barquiel]

Brianalot Curren wrote...


If someone made an RPG like BGII now, no one would buy it and they wouldn't make any money.  Name the last "true" RPG made in the last little while.  Other than Oblivion or Fallout 3.

Dragon Age?

[Lord Atlia]

Things are going in circles. An RPG is a role playing game. It has two elements to it a role playing part and a game part. The fact of the matter is that for some reason there has been very little innovation in the game mechanics that go with the role playing since Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson created D&D. Because of this the game play became more definitive of the genre than the role playing. Seriously when has anybody role played in the last 4 or 5 non MMO Final Fantasy games. Genso Suikoden is closer to an RPG because you pick and choose who you recruit and sometimes the game changes accordingly, same with Chrono Trigger or Chrono Cross. That is the role playing of RPG, anytime your character actions somehow affect the story. The suicide mission was brilliant because it shifts and changes depending on a variety of variables, your ship, the trust between Shepard and his/her crew, and Shepard's own tactical prowess. The problem this causes is it allows you the first opportunity for a perfect game. A lot of us are used to Bioware forcing emotion on us by pigeonholing our actions, Kaidan or Ashley, DA:O SPOILERS Loghain or Alistair, but these are more unrealistic because a particularly cunning, intelligent, devious, or nefarious person is never limited to 2 choices. In conclusion game mechanics don't define RPGs by definition it is that we the people are so used to seeing the same game mechanics over and over that change in game play is scary or probably a more realistic thing to say is that change is unwanted. There are two types of gamers, gamers and gamers who predominantly play one genre. Thus people who play only the games traditionally associated with RPGs (Fallout, BG, Tales of..., Suikoden, FF, Lunar, and so forth) are going to have the most backlash against Bioware and to a lesser extent Bethesda as they shake up the genre.

[Jean de Valette]

Black Bizart wrote...
In other news, it's a computer game. Get a life, dude.

What are you doing here then, if you have such a busy life?  I'm here to give my opion to what the OP posted. And I don't have time to spend all day playing ME2 or posting here, I do that after work.

I wasn't trashing Bioware for making a bad game. Nor do I think Bioware is the worst game developer, they're still my favourite in fact. I've bought every Bio (derived) game except Jade Empire, NWN1 and ME1. I also think KotOR was superior to KotOR2.

I was reacting to the appologist (and the other guy who commented on my post) in the first post, who seems to think stripping complexity, choice, NPCs and depth is  "getting with the programme" and making the roleplaying experience more fun, or that adding those would make the game unplayable these days.

But I don't cry myself to sleep over the lost talent Bioware once showed, and I keep buying their products because they do make good games. They still can't beat the BG series though and it looks like they're not trying.

Modifié par Jean de Valette, 23 février 2010 - 07:55 .

[Nastrod]

While it is not perfect is it my favorite game ever and I have been a gamer for a very long time. There is so much that ME2 not only does it do it good but it does it amazingly good. ME2 is the perfect example of a epic movie experience but in a game with gameplay.


and yes ME2 is VERY much a rpg

Modifié par Nastrod, 23 février 2010 - 08:02 .

[Canez fan 1988]

I agree with the OP. ME2 did what any good sequel would do, and that is improve upon what it's predecessor started. ME2 is hand's down better than ME1, with a few flaws here and there.

[Oawa]

Jean de Valette wrote...

Black Bizart wrote...
In other news, it's a computer game. Get a life, dude.

What are you doing here then, if you have such a busy life?  I'm here to give my opion to what the OP posted. And I don't have time to spend all day playing ME2 or posting here, I do that after work.

I wasn't trashing Bioware for making a bad game. Nor do I think Bioware is the worst game developer, they're still my favourite in fact. I've bought every Bio (derived) game except Jade Empire, NWN1 and ME1. I also think KotOR was superior to KotOR2.

I was reacting to the appologist (and the other guy who commented on my post) in the first post, who seems to think stripping complexity, choice, NPCs and depth is  "getting with the programme" and making the roleplaying experience more fun, or that adding those would make the game unplayable these days.

But I don't cry myself to sleep over the lost talent Bioware once showed, and I keep buying their products because they do make good games. They still can't beat the BG series though and it looks like they're not trying.

If the OP is an appologist, than you sir are an extremist.  No offense.

[Daeion]

Brianalot Curren wrote...
Name the last "true" RPG made in the last little while.  Other than Oblivion or Fallout 3.  From what I hear fallout new vegas is going to be made for the console masses as you so bluntly put it.

What do you consider Dragon Age to be?

[marshalleck]

Barquiel wrote...

Brianalot Curren wrote...


If someone made an RPG like BGII now, no one would buy it and they wouldn't make any money.  Name the last "true" RPG made in the last little while.  Other than Oblivion or Fallout 3.

Dragon Age?

Oh please, I've read tons of complaints on this social site about how horrible Dragon Age is, and "haha 'spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate' yeah right!!"

The purists will never be pleased, Baldur's Gate 2 is the pinnacle of all existence.

Modifié par marshalleck, 23 février 2010 - 08:14 .

[Daeion]

Nastrod wrote...
and yes ME2 is VERY much a rpg

Depends on your definition of  a RPG, like I said different people will define the genre differently.  I've had people argue that ODST is a RPG simply because you can choose in what order to do the missions.

[Daeion]

Canez fan 1988 wrote...

I agree with the OP. ME2 did what any good sequel would do, and that is improve upon what it's predecessor started. ME2 is hand's down better than ME1, with a few flaws here and there.

It's your opinion that it is better, others are of the opinion that it isn't better.

[Jzadek72]

ammit23 wrote...

Michoss wrote...

Everyone on this forum who is whining about 'how ME2 is shooter, not a RPG' seems to think 'RPG=Game when you are knight and you kill orcz and dragonz and save the world'. you know. Orthodox

I would disagree, I personally haven't ever played a DND-style until DA:O.  To some, RPG is nothing more that a game that focuses almost exclusively on character development.  You end up with a strong emtional attachment to many of the NPC's.  For me, and from what I've heard also a lot of others, ME2 just didn't give you that same level of attachment.  Doesn't mean it wasn't a ton of fun to play and a great game all around, just not as powerful as ME1 and all-around defies categorization.  It's just what it is.... it's ME2!

Low attatchment? I thought that the squadmates this time around were much more complex, and became much more attatched to them.

[aeetos21]

I don't necessarily agree that it's the best RPG ever made, but rather it certainly is the best 3rd person RPG ever made where you step into an already established persona. Shepard is Shepard, the choices available to him/her at a time may be none of the ones you yourself would choose to make or say.



But like I said, defintiely the best 3rd person RPG ever created and probably in the running for best cinematic game yet.

[Daeion]

Jzadek72 wrote...

ammit23 wrote...

Michoss wrote...

Everyone on this forum who is whining about 'how ME2 is shooter, not a RPG' seems to think 'RPG=Game when you are knight and you kill orcz and dragonz and save the world'. you know. Orthodox

I would disagree, I personally haven't ever played a DND-style until DA:O.  To some, RPG is nothing more that a game that focuses almost exclusively on character development.  You end up with a strong emtional attachment to many of the NPC's.  For me, and from what I've heard also a lot of others, ME2 just didn't give you that same level of attachment.  Doesn't mean it wasn't a ton of fun to play and a great game all around, just not as powerful as ME1 and all-around defies categorization.  It's just what it is.... it's ME2!

Low attatchment? I thought that the squadmates this time around were much more complex, and became much more attatched to them.

If people like you didn't feel this way then ME2 would be a massive failure since the entire game really revolves around building your squad and introducing the new characters, the collector threat is just a background.

[JrayM16]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...




>Implying that forced shooter elements can compare to almost entirely optional mako segments
>Denying that ME2s shooter elements invade the rest of the game and take precedence (80-90% of almost all loyalty missions are simple combat stages with pissant amounts of dialogue and exposition woven in)

How does ME1 not have forced shooter elements?  Most of ME1 involved shooting as well, including the few character side quests that there were( which were pretty shallow compared to ME2 character quests)
Also, how can you use a phrase like "forced shooter segemts" when the primary gameplay mechanic of both games was shooting?  How does ME1 not ahve these "forced shooter segemnts"? 

Your arguments are really starting to fall flat, and it looks really pathetic when you start criticizing things in ME2 that were the same or even worse in ME1.  You used to be able to provide some substance and reasonsin behind your arguments Dink, now, you're jsut making stuff up and being condescending towards those who disagree.  It's kind of sad, I used to really enjoy the interesting debates we had, but now you've basically become the negative equivalent of the "this game roxx" fanboys you always hated on the old forums.

[JrayM16]

Oh, and b***ing aside, I thought the OP made a very good, post, though I wouldnt call ME2 perfect, it certainly has problems but was a fantastic game.