465 réponses à ce sujet

[The Mythical Magician]

Aisynia wrote...

The Mythical Magician wrote...

To clarify by die hard fans... I meant the RPG folk.

Still not buying it.

I guess you didn't read all my posts in this thread...

[Xandurpein]

ZennExile wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

ZennExile wrote...

Easy enough.

Loot represents discovery, depth, customization, collection  (RPG elements yes?)
Dice rolls literally mean random chance (also an important RPG element)
Character sheets are just a reflection of advancement (paramount RPG element)

So technically all those things are important RPG elements.

Loot can represent discovery and customization and collection. While I think exploration is a vital part of roleplaying, I think loot is a very minor part of discovery for me. Finding new places and people is much more important. Customization can be nice, but is not dependable on loot. You can change your appearance a lot in ME2 really, it's just not handled primarily by loot. Collection might be important to you, but it's not to me really.

Dice roll are only part of standard PnP RPG because it is a needed crutch to resolve some situations in PnP games. If you can resolve the same situation by a hair trigger so much the better. Dice rolls are a means not an end.

Character advancement is really also mostly a crutch to me. A good free form RP don't need it. I can understand that people like it as it gives you a number that gives you a sense of accomplishment, but it's not really necessary. The story and the interactivity is the necessary part.

You just told me you don't like RPGs.  Oh and free form RP can't have any rules and therefor cannot be a game.  There is Free Form Advancement in RPGs though which you probably are confusing the term with.  However again it's advancement.  Oh and character advancement is the most important element that defines a game as being an RPG.  Just so this is clear.

There are games that fit your definition of an RPG that I enjoy very much thank you. Baldur's Gate and Dragon Age are some of the best gaming experiences I have ever had. I still have lots of fun playing PnP sessions with my old friends now and then. I just don't like them for the same reason you seem to do. I would love Dragon Age even if it didn't include character advancement, and I would enjoy PnP sesssions with my friends even without levels (we do that sometimes, even if dice are hard to do without in PnP).

It's true that I don't like RPG just because they are RPG, but how many people do.

[ZennExile]

Xandurpein wrote...

ZennExile wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

ZennExile wrote...

Easy enough.

Loot represents discovery, depth, customization, collection  (RPG elements yes?)
Dice rolls literally mean random chance (also an important RPG element)
Character sheets are just a reflection of advancement (paramount RPG element)

So technically all those things are important RPG elements.

Loot can represent discovery and customization and collection. While I think exploration is a vital part of roleplaying, I think loot is a very minor part of discovery for me. Finding new places and people is much more important. Customization can be nice, but is not dependable on loot. You can change your appearance a lot in ME2 really, it's just not handled primarily by loot. Collection might be important to you, but it's not to me really.

Dice roll are only part of standard PnP RPG because it is a needed crutch to resolve some situations in PnP games. If you can resolve the same situation by a hair trigger so much the better. Dice rolls are a means not an end.

Character advancement is really also mostly a crutch to me. A good free form RP don't need it. I can understand that people like it as it gives you a number that gives you a sense of accomplishment, but it's not really necessary. The story and the interactivity is the necessary part.

You just told me you don't like RPGs.  Oh and free form RP can't have any rules and therefor cannot be a game.  There is Free Form Advancement in RPGs though which you probably are confusing the term with.  However again it's advancement.  Oh and character advancement is the most important element that defines a game as being an RPG.  Just so this is clear.

There are games that fit your definition of an RPG that I enjoy very much thank you. Baldur's Gate and Dragon Age are some of the best gaming experiences I have ever had. I still have lots of fun playing PnP sessions with my old friends now and then. I just don't like them for the same reason you seem to do. I would love Dragon Age even if it didn't include character advancement, and I would enjoy PnP sesssions with my friends even without levels (we do that sometimes, even if dice are hard to do without in PnP).

It's true that I don't like RPG just because they are RPG, but how many people do.

Now you're just dodging.  You don't like RPGs.  Mass Effect 1 was an RPG.  It is the reason there is a Mass Effect 2.  Mass Effect 2 is "SUPPOSED" to be a ****ing RPG.  Don't you get it?  Halo 2 wasn't a ****ing Real Time Strategy game because Halo is a ****ing billion+ shooter IP.  But Mass Effect 2, which is the sequel to an advanced RPG, is 95% shooter with RPG lightly peppered in just for show.  Do you not get how that might be a problem?

[Zulu_DFA]

The Mythical Magician wrote...

EDITED: I believe why ME2 failed for a good portion of us is because of Bioware's focus on the mainstream crowd though business wise it is prefect for making quick money but overall you guys lost the main plot on this switch of focus. I'm a fan of you guys and I love your work but ME2 disappointed me and most likely many others. I hope on your next project you guys focus on more on the story of a game than trying to please every crowd out there.

ME2 is a great game but its not as great as its predecessor for the fact that the focus was different which Imo sacrificed the main plot and the immersion.
<_<

Singing below every single word of this.

[jbadm04]

Dont mix up character development with advancement. Advancement is not crucial to RPG, not even a RPG game. Advancement is an illusion given by developers to trick you into believing of development. Example: at lvl 1 you have 50 HP and you have a weapon doing 10damage on average, your average enemy is a goblin with 100 HP, basicaly you need 10 strikes/hits to kill it.... advance a couple of hours. Now you are lvl 50, you have 1000 HP and your weapon do about 200damage on average, and your average enemy is a goblin champion leader with 2000 HP, basicaly you need again just 10 strikes/hits to kill it. This is an illusion, not advancement. Even various powers do not realy develop... lets say some sort of "magic missile" can be raised one level every 5 character levels and the damageoutput doubles, on the last level the damage output is tripled compared to the previous level. But this is taken into account, either the number of enemies raises, or their hp. In the long run you need the same number of "magic missiles" to kill everyone around, just like 20 levels back.

[FlintlockJazz]

Xandurpein wrote...

ZennExile wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

ZennExile wrote...

Easy enough.

Loot represents discovery, depth, customization, collection  (RPG elements yes?)
Dice rolls literally mean random chance (also an important RPG element)
Character sheets are just a reflection of advancement (paramount RPG element)

So technically all those things are important RPG elements.

Loot can represent discovery and customization and collection. While I think exploration is a vital part of roleplaying, I think loot is a very minor part of discovery for me. Finding new places and people is much more important. Customization can be nice, but is not dependable on loot. You can change your appearance a lot in ME2 really, it's just not handled primarily by loot. Collection might be important to you, but it's not to me really.

Dice roll are only part of standard PnP RPG because it is a needed crutch to resolve some situations in PnP games. If you can resolve the same situation by a hair trigger so much the better. Dice rolls are a means not an end.

Character advancement is really also mostly a crutch to me. A good free form RP don't need it. I can understand that people like it as it gives you a number that gives you a sense of accomplishment, but it's not really necessary. The story and the interactivity is the necessary part.

You just told me you don't like RPGs.  Oh and free form RP can't have any rules and therefor cannot be a game.  There is Free Form Advancement in RPGs though which you probably are confusing the term with.  However again it's advancement.  Oh and character advancement is the most important element that defines a game as being an RPG.  Just so this is clear.

There are games that fit your definition of an RPG that I enjoy very much thank you. Baldur's Gate and Dragon Age are some of the best gaming experiences I have ever had. I still have lots of fun playing PnP sessions with my old friends now and then. I just don't like them for the same reason you seem to do. I would love Dragon Age even if it didn't include character advancement, and I would enjoy PnP sesssions with my friends even without levels (we do that sometimes, even if dice are hard to do without in PnP).

It's true that I don't like RPG just because they are RPG, but how many people do.

Xand, do yourself a favour and stop feeding the troll.   Well, he's either a troll or a rollplayer who doesn't grasp the vast range and motivations for playing rpgs outside his own narrow experience.

[The Mythical Magician]

Balerion84 wrote...

The Mythical Magician wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...
If someone can somehow prove that loot, dice roll and character sheets are in fact a part of the actual definition of what an RPG is, then I really couldn't care less if ME2 is an RPG or not. It's a bloody wonderful storydriven game where I can immerse myself in the role of Commander Shepard and save the galaxy whatever you decide to call it.

DnD is basically what defines a RPG and it haves Dice rolls, characters sheets, loot, ext.

DnD (Dungeons and Dragons) is what popularized Role Playing Games (RPGs), it doesn't define what RPG is. It's just the most popular form of RPG. Mass Effect is not DnD. Baldur's Gate was AD&D (Advanced Dungeons and Dragons). If you want a game based on AD&D or DnD you have to have a license (if I'm correct, AD&D license is owned by Wizards of the Sword Coast)
RPG means more than just DnD. RPG is about Role Playing. Not about loot, or dices, or anything like that. That's where people get it wrong most of the time. You can play a form of DnD (Role Play) without dices.

Going by the definition of RPG, every game where you assume a role of a character is RPG. (Yes, even Modern Warfare... sad, I know). And when it comes to actual Role Playing in video games, there's not many (if any) games that are better than ME1 OR ME2.

ME 1&2 are not licensed. Their rules are made by BioWare, so saying that RPG should have loot because DnD has loot is wrong and ignorant. 
There.

What you just said is opinionated besides the part Bioware makes the rules for their games.
Most to all RPGs have DnD play system in them including some Action RPGs like Oblivion & ME1, I have never seen or played a pure RPG without the DnD play system in it. Its safe to assume that DnD is what defines what a RPG is.

Modifié par The Mythical Magician, 25 février 2010 - 03:57 .

[Twigginater]

I don't understand how even if in his very narrow definition this game isn't an RPG proves anything.



So what? Are you an RPG fan not a good games fan?

[ZennExile]

jbadm04 wrote...

blah blah blah Magic missle, I LARP on friday nights blah blah.

Do you have a point or are you just trying to feel like you contributed without actually doing it?

[bjdbwea]

The Mythical Magician wrote...

ME2 is a great game but its not as great as its predecessor for the fact that the focus was different which Imo sacrificed the main plot and the immersion.

Completely agreed. But you have to understand this: ME 2 is tailored to appeal to the casual gamer / console audience. Apart from the obvious dumbing down, this is in my opinion also one of the reasons why the story is so weak: It is actually a collection of short stories, each one solvable within an hour, only very loosely connected by talk of a big thread. This is done so that those people with short attention spans and little tolerance for complicated stuff can play without getting angry.

I may exaggerate a bit. And probably BioWare/EA have overdone it and even that audience would be able and willing to experience a better plot. But together with time constraints, that's my explanation for the weak story in ME 2. It may sound as if the game is bad in my opinion, which it is not. It's just not a worthy successor to the best game ever.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 25 février 2010 - 03:56 .

[Xandurpein]

ZennExile wrote...

Now you're just dodging.  You don't like RPGs.  Mass Effect 1 was an RPG.  It is the reason there is a Mass Effect 2.  Mass Effect 2 is "SUPPOSED" to be a ****ing RPG.  Don't you get it?  Halo 2 wasn't a ****ing Real Time Strategy game because Halo is a ****ing billion+ shooter IP.  But Mass Effect 2, which is the sequel to an advanced RPG, is 95% shooter with RPG lightly peppered in just for show.  Do you not get how that might be a problem?

1. OK I stand corrected. The 30 years of my life I have devoted to playing RPG has obviouly been a sad waste of time as I did not, contrary to my own belief like playing them. It's a bit to take in really. To have deluded myself into thinking I enjoyed it all these years...

2. Do you even bother with the conversations at all in the game or do you just space bar everything anyone say to approach 95% shooter? The ratio of conversations to combat is about the same in ME1 and ME2 and feels just about right to me. I can see your problem if you wish less combat and conversations and more fiddleing with stats, but I don't feel the same.

Modifié par Xandurpein, 25 février 2010 - 04:03 .

[Knoll Argonar]

I don't understand what does the fact of ME2 being some pure-lootmadness-levelingup-ftw-RPG or just something different has to do with the MAIN PLOT ._.



Anyway, you can role play without D&D rules, I've done it many times. And it's cool.

[incinerator950]

ME 2 Failed?



Thats lulz if I ever heard correctly.

[FlintlockJazz]

bjdbwea wrote...

The Mythical Magician wrote...

ME2 is a great game but its not as great as its predecessor for the fact that the focus was different which Imo sacrificed the main plot and the immersion.

Completely agreed. But you have to understand this: ME 2 is tailored to appeal to the casual gamer / console audience. Apart from the obvious dumbing down, this is in my opinion also one of the reasons why the story is so weak: It is actually a collection of short stories, each one solvable within an hour, only very loosely connected by talk of a big thread. This is done so that those people with short attention spans and little tolerance for complicated stuff can play without getting angry.

I may exaggerate a bit. And probably BioWare/EA have overdone it and even that audience would be able and willing to experience a better plot. But together with time constraints, that's my explanation for the weak story in ME 2. It may sound as if the game is bad in my opinion, which it is not. It's just not a worthy successor to the best game ever.

All opinion.  The short stories help expand the ME universe and give differing perspectives while allowing the devs to try out different story ideas.  The skillsets have been refined to remove redundant skills while differentiating the classes further. 

Just because you lack the comprehension to understand this does not give you the right to be offensiveand belittling towards those of a different bent than yourself (see what I did there?), and yes you exaggerate to an excessive degree.

[The Mythical Magician]

Knoll Argonar wrote...

I don't understand what does the fact of ME2 being some pure-lootmadness-levelingup-ftw-RPG or just something different has to do with the MAIN PLOT ._.

It doesn't have to do with the main plot, some dude derailed the topic to what makes an RPG. 

Knoll Argonar wrote...Anyway, you can role play without D&D rules, I've done it many times. And it's cool.

Real Life RP yea sure...
 

[bjdbwea]

FlintlockJazz wrote...

The short stories help expand the ME universe and give differing perspectives while allowing the devs to try out different story ideas.

Try out? What's that supposed to mean? They'd better try out their ideas before, and put only those in the game that work. Apart from that, I even agree with you. Short stories are fine. In fact short stories have always been part of RPGs, they are called side quests. But a good game can not only consist of unrelated side quests, it needs a good main plot too. And ME 2 totally fails to deliver that, be it deliberately (catering to the casual gamers) or more or less unwillingly (time constraints / bad time management).

[FlintlockJazz]

Synriah wrote...

I don't agree with you The Mythical Magician. ME2 may not be full of RPG game but it was a great game. I've played many RPG games and I always accepted that "Something is missing in these games and it was action." Morrowind and Oblivion tried it before but it wasn't so effective I think. Fallout 3 were more successful than these two. ME1 was a great game but its inventory and stores were killing me. I love its level system. ME2 was week about that but Bioware always mentioned that "They were trying to add some action elements in game." It couldn't be much better than that. If you still prefer not to kill your enemies so easily so be it. But when I start playing ME1 again it was incredible boring to try shooting every enemy in same style and you can't hit an enemy every time when he was in cover and while you were seeing his head because of the graphical and coding problems. ME2 made an effective mix of these both. I don't prefer playing DA:O. Because I've bored from that game when I was playing DA:O in my friends computer. I love Bioware but there is two different kind of game and I'll always prefer ME2.

About its story I don't know how you played or what did you mean with that "Please Bioware stick with the Main Plot" exactly but I can easily say that its story is great I don't say it's perfect it could be in some parts but they made their point they wanted to show us the dark side of the galaxy and they made it. I don't blame them about anything. I've played most of the games of Bioware and I can say that too. That game is their golden shot until ME3. I loved BG first and BG2 and then KOTOR I couldn't play KOTOR 2 I've played DA:O little bit I've finisehed ME1 three times. Even I still say ME2 still need some improvements but I don't see any better game in the sector now. So if you didn't like it, yeah you are free to say your own idea but it's just your idea. I know most of the people loved that game and they are still playing like me over and over again.

Every game have to mix good parts of the game types like RPG and action etc. Because it's just boring to have only RPG or only FPS or only Adventure. ME2 is the best of it. And that's my opinion of course. Everybody have their own opinion in the end.

This.  I would subscribe to your newsletter if you had one Synriah!

[Xandurpein]

bjdbwea wrote...

FlintlockJazz wrote...

The short stories help expand the ME universe and give differing perspectives while allowing the devs to try out different story ideas.

Try out? What's that supposed to mean? They'd better try out their ideas before, and put only those in the game that work. Apart from that, I even agree with you. Short stories are fine. In fact short stories have always been part of RPGs, they are called side quests. But a good game can not only consist of unrelated side quests, it needs a good main plot too. And ME 2 totally fails to deliver that, be it deliberately (catering to the casual gamers) or more or less unwillingly (time constraints / bad time management).

Could you please explain to me how the design choice of having several shorter stories, rather than one main plot could in anyway be construed as 'catering to casual gamers'. Agreed it is in a sense a collection of short stories, rather than a long story, but show me any game that has more well written and thought provoking stories than Mass Effect 2. I can think of a few that can stand next to it, but they are all from Bioware.

[Arbiter156]

how dare you! "shepard bursts through the door with all squadmates from ME1 and ME2 and courtmarshals the mythical magician

[jbadm04]

ZennExile wrote...

Do you have a point or are you just trying to feel like you contributed without actually doing it?

Contributing to the thread topic? No. I commented one of the explanations here about "what is RPG". I dont even know exactly where this thread turned from "please bioware stick with the main plot" to a "rpg discussion".

PS: your art of quoting (i.e. changing the text to something that suits your opinion) is quite ignorant. And on top of that, your chosen words are even insulting. LARP? Never was on one, my "post" didnt even sound that way. I mean, how would you like it when I would quote you this way "Quote ZennExile wrote... babling ranting jerking because I dont understand... EndQuote"?

[JamieCOTC]

ME2 does have its faults, but overall, I love it.

[bjdbwea]

Xandurpein wrote...

Could you please explain to me how the design choice of having several shorter stories, rather than one main plot could in anyway be construed as 'catering to casual gamers'.

In short: Casual games = quick in, quick out. It has to be possible to start and quit playing at leisure and at any time. Not compatible with this concept are: "Complicated" things and everything that requires you to sit there for a longer time or to remember things. But all these things are required for proper main stories with a minimum of depth. So, there.

Xandurpein wrote...

Agreed it is in a sense a collection of short stories, rather than a long story, but show me any game that has more well written and thought provoking stories than Mass Effect 2. I can think of a few that can stand next to it, but they are all from Bioware.

That is true, and doesn't speak well for the gaming industry. Indeed, almost all my examples would come from BioWare, the best example ME 1. That's why I am as disappointed with ME 2 as I am. The short stories would be great if they were side quests. It would indeed be the best companion side quests ever. But as the main game, it just doesn't cut it. ME 1 was like a playable Hollywood movie. ME 2 is like a playable TV series. Good for you if you like this change. I don't.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 25 février 2010 - 04:40 .

[The Mythical Magician]

Synriah wrote...

I don't agree with you The Mythical Magician. ME2 may not be full of RPG game but it was a great game. I've played many RPG games and I always accepted that "Something is missing in these games and it was action." Morrowind and Oblivion tried it before but it wasn't so effective I think. Fallout 3 were more successful than these two. ME1 was a great game but its inventory and stores were killing me. I love its level system. ME2 was week about that but Bioware always mentioned that "They were trying to add some action elements in game." It couldn't be much better than that. If you still prefer not to kill your enemies so easily so be it. But when I start playing ME1 again it was incredible boring to try shooting every enemy in same style and you can't hit an enemy every time when he was in cover and while you were seeing his head because of the graphical and coding problems. ME2 made an effective mix of these both. I don't prefer playing DA:O. Because I've bored from that game when I was playing DA:O in my friends computer. I love Bioware but there is two different kind of game and I'll always prefer ME2.

About its story I don't know how you played or what did you mean with that "Please Bioware stick with the Main Plot" exactly but I can easily say that its story is great I don't say it's perfect it could be in some parts but they made their point they wanted to show us the dark side of the galaxy and they made it. I don't blame them about anything. I've played most of the games of Bioware and I can say that too. That game is their golden shot until ME3. I loved BG first and BG2 and then KOTOR I couldn't play KOTOR 2 I've played DA:O little bit I've finisehed ME1 three times. Even I still say ME2 still need some improvements but I don't see any better game in the sector now. So if you didn't like it, yeah you are free to say your own idea but it's just your idea. I know most of the people loved that game and they are still playing like me over and over again.

Every game have to mix good parts of the game types like RPG and action etc. Because it's just boring to have only RPG or only FPS or only Adventure. ME2 is the best of it. And that's my opinion of course. Everybody have their own opinion in the end.

I may not agree with you but I respect your opinion and I respect that you didn't bash me, haha. Anyways what I meant from "Please Bioware stick with the Main Plot" I meant that Bioware should of had more collectors/reapers main quests in ME2 .. They put so much work into the squad characters that the main plot of the series/game kinda got ignored, this is the middle of the trilogy so I was expecting huge heaps of information about the reapers, collectors, protheans but the only thing that was close to huge was the connection between collectors & protheans and I was expecting huge levels & epic boss fights which could bring some more plot twists into the series but there wasn't any to be found.

Modifié par The Mythical Magician, 25 février 2010 - 04:48 .

[FlintlockJazz]

bjdbwea wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Could you please explain to me how the design choice of having several shorter stories, rather than one main plot could in anyway be construed as 'catering to casual gamers'.

In short: Casual games = quick in, quick out. It has to be possible to start and quit playing at leisure and at any time. Not compatible with this concept are: "Complicated" things and everything that requires you to sit there for a longer time or to remember things. But all these things are required for proper main stories with a minimum of depth. So, there.

Actually I would argue that casual = no or barebones plot designed only to give excuse for shooting people.  In a way, short stories can be confusing for someone who is used to a big story that leads them from start to finish.

bjdbwea wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

Agreed it is in a sense a collection of short stories, rather than a long story, but show me any game that has more well written and thought provoking stories than Mass Effect 2. I can think of a few that can stand next to it, but they are all from Bioware.

That is true, and doesn't speak well for the gaming industry. Indeed, almost all my examples would come from BioWare, the best example ME 1. That's why I am as disappointed with ME 2 as I am. The short stories would be great if they were side quests. It would indeed be the best companion side quests ever. But as the main game, it just doesn't cut it. ME 1 was like a playable Hollywood movie. ME 2 is like a playable TV series. Good for you if you like this change. I don't.

I understand where you're coming from, but personally I rather enjoyed the short stories.  They allowed the writers to try out vastly different styles within the same game, from the serial killer hunting in Samara's to the ethical dilemma of Mordin's tale.  Most games these days are built around a central plot, so Bioware's approach was quite refreshing for me.  Then again, I enjoy the idea of cruising around seeking my own adventures Firefly style.