10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Orchomene]

It may be clearer if I say that ME2 all the elements specific to RPG removed.

Character interactions are not specific to RPGs, adventure games have also character interactions. Combat is also not RPG specific. Levelling of characters has no impact in the game.

Thus, ME2 is an hybrid action/adventure.

[KitsuneRommel]

Orchomene wrote...

It may be clearer if I say that ME2 all the elements specific to RPG removed.
Character interactions are not specific to RPGs, adventure games have also character interactions. Combat is also not RPG specific. Levelling of characters has no impact in the game.
Thus, ME2 is an hybrid action/adventure.

Would you consider Assassin's Creed 2 an RPG then? It has character progression (you learn new skills), character interaction, exploration, open world gameplay, limited inventory, shops, quests, etc.

[Orchomene]

I have never played Assassin's creed 2 and thus can not answer. All I can say is that a game can be advertised as a RPG and yet not be a RPG. Take Diablo as an example.

[KitsuneRommel]

Orchomene wrote...

I have never played Assassin's creed 2 and thus can not answer. All I can say is that a game can be advertised as a RPG and yet not be a RPG. Take Diablo as an example.

But it is an RPG. Just like Nethack, Angband, Torchlight, etc. are. If we get nitpicky NO computer game is really an RPG in the classical sense.

[KitsuneRommel]

Jebel Krong wrote...

that mission is either the hardest or the easiest in the game, depending on your abilities. combat in me1 was a lot more gimped than 2, and the level design also lets you "cheat" at points, thanks to some very dumb ai.

Well I did finish that quest by sniping them around corners where they did not hit me back. My biggest gripe with ME1 is how fast you become an unkillable superhero capable of singlehandedly destroying armies of Geth. And I though adept would be a hard class to play. I guess the next time I'll play a techie and don't use Liara on the team.

[bjdbwea]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Well I did finish that quest by sniping them around corners where they did not hit me back. My biggest gripe with ME1 is how fast you become an unkillable superhero capable of singlehandedly destroying armies of Geth. And I thought adept would be a hard class to play. I guess the next time I'll play a techie and don't use Liara on the team.

I assume you didn't play ME 1 on highest difficulty. But even if so, it doesn't change the fact that thanks to the removal of RPG elements you're "an unkillable superhero capable of singlehandedly destroying armies of Geth" right from the beginning in ME 2, and yes, even on highest difficulty. Right from when Shepard wakes up after two years. Especially the "unkillable" part is true, as Shepard just shrugs off even direct hits from rockets. So what you use as criticism against the ME 1 RPG system, is true right from the beginning of ME 2 even without it. So how was the removal an improvement? At least with an RPG system you can ignore some of the overpowered skills if you want to make game a bit more difficult.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 02 juin 2010 - 03:33 .

[kalle90]

Ecael wrote...
People can discuss the differences between the two all they want, but they're essentially the same thing. You can't like one of the two and then say you absolutely hate apples because you don't like the other, however.

The discussion comes down to: ME1>ME2, ME1<ME2 or ME1~ME2

They are both good, but ME2 was definitely the worse one, the dissapointing one IMO. I may try both of those apples, but I probably end up buying and eating only 1 kind once I have tried them both. I damn sure hope the 3rd one is closer to the one I like and not the other that's "quite a bit like it"

That said, comments about ME2 being horrible are exaggeration IMO. If your standards are that high there are less than 10 good games in the world for you.


To the last few posts: More and more games are trying to be action/Rpg hybrids. AC, Arkham Asylum, GTA, Bioshock, Gears of war 3 will have RPG features. Thing is that I see ME1 as RPG/Action hybrid while ME2 is action/RPG hybrid. That made ME1 more unique.

Modifié par kalle90, 02 juin 2010 - 03:30 .

[KitsuneRommel]

bjdbwea wrote...

I assume you didn't play ME 1 on highest difficulty

Sadly, I did. I have to say that my veteran Vanguard playthrough was a lot harder but if I could have had Singularity power back then  I wouldn't have been.

Here. Let me spell it out for you all. Biotics with all the upgrades are RIDICULOUSLY OP! From what I gather soldiers with constant immunity are RIDICULOUSLY OP too.

All the encounters come down to "Oh 4 scary Krogans, *casts Singularity* *casts Warp* shoot shoot shoot shoot *casts Lift* shoot shoot shoot shoot *casts Singularity* shoot shoot ok they all died." or "Oh look 2 Geth Colossi. *casts lift* *casts throw* shoot shoot shoot one down *cast Lift again* shoot shoot shoot. Yep he's down too."

There's just too many abilities/mods increasing the duration of biotics and mods reducing the cooldown of them. I was bored of the combat after level 30 or so because the challenge of the low levels simply disappeared.

THAT is the biggest reason why I haven't played ME1 more often.

Edit: I don't claim to be awesome in shooters either. I *used* to be when I played Action Quake2 actively. Our 8 person clan was in top 3 in europe. I haven't played most modern shooters at all.

Modifié par KitsuneRommel, 02 juin 2010 - 03:42 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Where you been? 

Eh? Do you mean me being away from the forums? If thats what you are talking about, contrary to the pathetic strawman that certain individuals around here like to build up about me, I dont spend all my time here trolling anyone who likes the game. I actually find this community an almost completely unlikeable place to be right now, and have actually felt that way for a long time. Ever since the final few months before ME2s release, my active participation in this community has ultimately boiled down to defending my viewpoint about the direction this series is taking, and how I dont find it to be particularly interesting. Naturally over those many months my tone has developed the much more defensive and combative edge I now post with today, but folks dont care about those sort of details.

I still occasionally drop by every now and again, as I have done here recently. After all, I still paid for the damn game (CE version no less), so Im always very much committed to posting my complete and utter disappointment with ME2, as is my right. I tend to just stick to groups more than anything now though. I find the smaller groups a much nicer place to be. Apparantly thats "elitism" in the eyes of certain mods, but then of course they would say that.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 02 juin 2010 - 03:59 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

That element being? What? Inventory? Did ME2 suddently change into Tetris or what?

Both are shooters with RPG elements and while ME1 had inventory, ME2 has greatly improved character interaction.

Spot on there pal. I particularly loved the part where they greatly improved character interaction by making it significantly worse than in ME1. That was a doozy.

Listen, I know folks look at the shooter missions branded "loyalty missions" as some kind of deep well of character interaction, but thats nonsense. All of them besides Thane and Samara massively rely on combat more than character interaction.

With the amount of characters requiring romance to get any decent interaction out of them on the normandy, and the general feeling that less is being said by more characters, Id say ME2 was a step back in character interaction.

Its a shame because they improved the conversations in terms of animation vastly. Just feels like the dialogue got too much "streamlining" to boot.

Edit: And none of that is even taking into account how Bioware virtually nuked "squadmate banter" almost entirely out of the game.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 02 juin 2010 - 04:07 .

[smudboy]

Ecael wrote...
I think it's more a difference in taste that does that - comparing McIntosh apples to Cortland apples.

People can discuss the differences between the two all they want, but they're essentially the same thing. You can't like one of the two and then say you absolutely hate apples because you don't like the other, however.

Ecael: Don't ask him to buy your fruit.

If all apples are created equal, why does one, after all this time, still not digest properly? (Answer: It wasn't made with human consumption in mind.)

[bjdbwea]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

THAT is the biggest reason why I haven't played ME1 more often.

So you care more about the action parts than anything else. Fair enough. I don't. I actually like the combat in ME 1 more, but I couldn't care less if the action part in ME 2 would be as simple as Pong. Of course combat in ME 1 was also far from perfect, but I don't care about that either. It's the main story and side stories, the writing, the characters, the decisions, and the presentation of all that, those are the things why I love ME 1 just as much as BG 2. And sadly, ME 2 isn't nearly on the same level in those regards.

[Veex]

bjdbwea wrote...
 It's the main story and side stories, the writing, the characters, the decisions, and the presentation of all that, those are the things why I love ME 1 just as much as BG 2. And sadly, ME 2 isn't nearly on the same level in those regards.

I'm surprised you've all managed to argue your own subjective opinions for almost 150 pages. That is some serious Mass Effect devotion.

[KitsuneRommel]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...



Spot
on there pal. I particularly loved the part where they greatly improved
character interaction by making it significantly worse than in ME1.
That was a doozy.

... Right. I'll just ignore you from now on.

bjdbwea wrote...

So you care more about the action parts than anything else.

Don't you start too. When I play games I expect a challenge. DA:O is really challenging game. ME1 is not. When most of the game is fighting is it wrong to expect that fighting to be challenging?

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

... Right. I'll just ignore you from now on.

Good for you buddy. Probably for the best if you cant take opinion being stated as fact being used against you when you choose to use it yourself.

[AlanC9]

bjdbwea wrote...
 But even if so, it doesn't change the fact that thanks to the removal of RPG elements you're "an unkillable superhero capable of singlehandedly destroying armies of Geth" right from the beginning in ME 2, and yes, even on highest difficulty. Right from when Shepard wakes up after two years. Especially the "unkillable" part is true, as Shepard just shrugs off even direct hits from rockets. So what you use as criticism against the ME 1 RPG system, is true right from the beginning of ME 2 even without it. So how was the removal an improvement? At least with an RPG system you can ignore some of the overpowered skills if you want to make game a bit more difficult.

This is an argument about ME2's difficulty, not its RPGness.

Shepard should start as a powerful character; he's supposed to be one. Sure, if ME2 was a more traditional RPG Shepard would gain vast amounts of power and competence over the course of the game. But that indicates a problem with RPG conventions themselves, not ME2.

[AlanC9]

KitsuneRommel wrote...
DA:O is really challenging game.

Compared to ME? You're serious?

[bjdbwea]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Don't you start too. When I play games I expect a challenge. DA:O is really challenging game. ME1 is not. When most of the game is fighting is it wrong to expect that fighting to be challenging?

No, I would prefer my games to be challenging too. Only that combat in ME 2 isn't more challenging than ME 1. As I said, you complain about being overpowered later on in ME 1, but you're exactly that right from the beginning in ME 2. And in many occasions you can just sit behind a crate forever and pick one enemy after the other. That's not a challenge, it's a shooting range. Maybe it's challenging on consoles with their clumsy controllers, but not on PC. In ME 1, most enemies would at least come after you, as long as the stupid AI and invisible barriers didn't prevent it of course.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 02 juin 2010 - 05:45 .

[KitsuneRommel]

AlanC9 wrote...

KitsuneRommel wrote...
DA:O is really challenging game.

Compared to ME? You're serious?

Yes? Have you played ME1 on max difficulty? It's a damn kinderkarten.

[chzr]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

KitsuneRommel wrote...
DA:O is really challenging game.

Compared to ME? You're serious?

Yes? Have you played ME1 on max difficulty? It's a damn kinderkarten.

as is dao (and me2, so...) :<

Modifié par chzr, 02 juin 2010 - 06:42 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Eh? Do you mean me being away from the forums? If thats what you are talking about, contrary to the pathetic strawman that certain individuals around here like to build up about me, I dont spend all my time here trolling anyone who likes the game. I actually find this community an almost completely unlikeable place to be right now, and have actually felt that way for a long time. Ever since the final few months before ME2s release, my active participation in this community has ultimately boiled down to defending my viewpoint about the direction this series is taking, and how I dont find it to be particularly interesting. Naturally over those many months my tone has developed the much more defensive and combative edge I now post with today, but folks dont care about those sort of details.

I still occasionally drop by every now and again, as I have done here recently. After all, I still paid for the damn game (CE version no less), so Im always very much committed to posting my complete and utter disappointment with ME2, as is my right. I tend to just stick to groups more than anything now though. I find the smaller groups a much nicer place to be. Apparantly thats "elitism" in the eyes of certain mods, but then of course they would say that.

Yep, that's what I meant.

Something else that's apparent is we as consumers have no rights and Bioware isn't obligated to even CONSIDER our input. We'll shut up and like their product or by golly as another member from the original boards put it that's conspicuously absent. At least at the original board, there was obviously way more RPG fans compared to the Social. Sad how the tide has turned so drastically. Though I suppose that's what happens when the marketing of near God-like RPG developers does a 180 from RPG to, well... you know.

*points to signature* 

[SkullandBonesmember]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

Don't you start too. When I play games I expect a challenge.

ME1's Veteran was perfect. Are you actually AGAINST OPTIONAL difficulty?

bjdbwea wrote...

Maybe it's challenging on consoles with their clumsy controllers, but not on PC. In ME 1, most enemies would at least come after you

I play on the Box and the enemies not only charge me way more in comparison with ME1, but actually encircle me.

[tonnactus]

Lumikki wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

If You don't know why Shepard was choosen, maybe you should play the game intro again, it was told first, when TIM and Miranda talked.

I dont care what they say.It never matters in the game.

[Lumikki]

In both Mass Effect games difficulty option only makes battle last longer, they don't make it more difficult. Except situation where player has no cover or enough space to move around or distance as forced too close.



That's because increasing difficulty only makes you weaker and enemies stronger. So, it just take longer time to shoot them down and less time them to kill you. That's all what difficulty option does. If you have found good tactic to situation, it doesn't matter what difficulty setting is, it's just time what it use more or less, unless games becomes so easy that you don't anymore need any tactics.



So, if You ask more challenge then ask game developers change the style of difficulty option, so that enemies actually change tactics too and become smarter.

Modifié par Lumikki, 02 juin 2010 - 07:26 .

[CroGamer002]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...



But at the same time, having do deal with situations you don't like at all is kind of standard in the hero business. Traditionally, heroes don't get that many choices. That they can live with, anyway.

That's just it, there's little to show that Shepard is in an unlikable situation. Shep's is way too accepting of is or her predicament.



Shepard: "Why should I work for your evil terrorist organization?"



TIM: "The plot says so"



Shepard: "Oh, okay then. Where do we go next"."



No not those exact words, but that's what it amounts to. Blind acceptance. People playing ME 2 for the first time would probably think Cerberus was simply a "morally grey" vigilante organization. Shep makes no agonizing decisions. No looking for other allies. Not even a "We're on the same side, for now. But when this is over..."



Are we absolutely certain Miranda didn't put a chip in Shep's brain?

Play game again.



Shep: Why should I work for evil terrorist organisation?



TIM: Becouse Collectors are kidnaping colonists and they are working with Reapers while Alliance and Council aren't doing anything about it. And you will have gain free Normandy and resourses. Plus extra credits when you complete missions.



Shep: Fine, but I'm not taking orders from you.



TIM: If I wanted to give you orders I would install control chip like Miranda wanted. I'll just give you directions.







Oh and you can ask Wrex, Liara, Kaidan/Ashley and Anderson to join you.

And what other allies?