231 réponses à ce sujet

[Murmillos]

Taxonomical wrote...
RPG'ers want strategy, complexity, and challenge.

And a sense of rewards

[Chakku Sama]

Looting would've been cool again, but I hate being over stocked in ME1. =\\

[Babu Yagu]

Duncan1337 wrote...

Loot is one of my favorite things about RPG's but when it isnt there it its really not a big deal to me.

I barley even noticed there wasnt any on ME2 because I was so into the story.

I would like loot back for ME3 though.

I didn't mind as much on my 1st playthrough because i was also realy into the story. But i didn't play ME1 multiple times (about 500 hours in total) because i wanted to see the same story over and over. I gave multiple play  throughs because i wanted to build the ultimate bad ass Shepard by getting the best possible weapons, armour and upgrades. I don't have the same urge to re-play with ME2.

Has anyone else played through ME2 as much as they would have on ME1 at this point ?

[Babu Yagu]

Massadonious1 wrote...

I'm starting to dislike all these entitled douchebags who somehow feel BioWare owes them because they spent their paper route money on Baldur's Gate, and each subsequent game has to follow in it's footsteps.

I don't mind loot and other traditional RPG systems when they are done well, but not every game they do has to be a loot-tastic, min/maxing stat fest, and it definetly shouldn't be considered any less of a RPG for the same reasons.

I'll play Dragon Age if I want such things. The Mass Effect story is better served, and works out fine, maybe even better, with the system it has now.

I don't think anyone feels that Bioware owes them. We are just wondering why something that only needed a minor tweek got a complete overhaul and was changed beyond recognition.

Oh. And i think you meant to say self-entitled douchebags you malevolent little cretin. Entitled means that they are actualy owed something. If that is true then GIVE US OUR LOOT.

[Poison_Berrie]

Taxonomical wrote...
I think it's the concern that many (rightfully) have about how anything with a hitpoint bar and an experience level is being called an RPG nowadays. While I love ME2, I have to admit that it lacks many of the features that make a game an RPG. 

Certainly a story is one of them, but any brain dead troglodyte with the ability to process sound into words can follow a story. RPG'ers crave a more stimulating challenge. This is where the "numbers" part of that comes in.

If all someone wants is a riveting plot, then they'd best be served reading a book rather than playing a video game. RPG'ers want strategy, complexity, and challenge.

I think people are kind of forgetting what the core of a RPG was about and biting their teeth in the rules-sets.
The numbers are a means to many players and not ever one who plays an RPG does so with the same motivation and desires.

Strategy, complexity and challenge can be done without a big loot or pure numbers.
Strategy is how you use the available resources/assets you have in the situation you end up in, which works with both limited and abundant availability.
Complexity can either be how much options are or can be open to you or how difficult the system is to comprehend.
Challenge is purely a gameplay design issue and is so for any game.

In the end I can only look at what I myself would regard an RPG.
Does it have a story that integrates the player and what he does, does it allow you a level of control over the way your character acts and looks, does it allow your character to progress in ability and strengths as the game progresses (a leveling system in essence). In essence I would call ME 2 a RPG. Perhaps it is lacking in certain departments, but I would find it hard to not call it an RPG.

[BlightWalker]

What most of the 'pro-loot' people are forgetting is that if you re-introduce items like Colossus X armor it would throw the balance of the combat system out of the window. It didn't matter much in ME1 because at high levels the game consisted of standing in the middle of the room and holding down the fire button or just stunlocking every single enemy with biotics but it would suck ME2.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Babu Yagu wrote...
I don't think anyone feels that Bioware owes them.

bahahahaha

No. People actually do feel that way. Lots of them.

[Flash_in_the_flesh]

All junk was omni-gelled so we don't have to bother.

[Massadonious1]

Taxonomical wrote...
RPG'ers want strategy, complexity, and challenge.

All of which you can only get by rummaging through every concievable storage container to find an epic sword of badness that someone forgot in their home when the inevitable invasion came, apparently.

Look, I'm a RPG dude too, but what bugs me is everyone seems to have this preconcieved notion of what an RPG should be. When a hybrid such as ME2 hits, you all don't know what to do with yourself. What do you mean I only have 4 class skills? Why can't I upgrade my strength? Where's my +2 damage to Geth mod? Why can't I spend 10 minutes omni-gel'ing everything?

When I hear people say "I love the game, but" that screams to me that you don't like the game simply because you don't like it. You don't like it because it's different. Breaking the standard RPG model and progressing the genre is not a bad thing.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Poison_Berrie wrote...
I think people are kind of forgetting what the core of a RPG was about and biting their teeth in the rules-sets.
The numbers are a means to many players and not ever one who plays an RPG does so with the same motivation and desires.

Strategy, complexity and challenge can be done without a big loot or pure numbers.
Strategy is how you use the available resources/assets you have in the situation you end up in, which works with both limited and abundant availability.
Complexity can either be how much options are or can be open to you or how difficult the system is to comprehend.
Challenge is purely a gameplay design issue and is so for any game.

In the end I can only look at what I myself would regard an RPG.
Does it have a story that integrates the player and what he does, does it allow you a level of control over the way your character acts and looks, does it allow your character to progress in ability and strengths as the game progresses (a leveling system in essence). In essence I would call ME 2 a RPG. Perhaps it is lacking in certain departments, but I would find it hard to not call it an RPG.

Good post.

[Vena_86]

Stabby McGoodstab wrote...

I hated grinding for loot. In the end, everyone ended up with the exact same Colossus gear anyway. Is loot really worth it if there's only one thing worth getting?

Thats wrong. My first playthrough Sheppard had light collossus and Tali had colossus armor. Specially finding Talis armor was very satisfying since it looked incredible good and had awesome stats. On my second playthrough Wrex had colossus armor which was equally satisfying, everyone else had very different stuff on them.
The armor I found and could purchase was also a deciding factor on who I took on missions, specially the last, long one.
Loot has big impact on replayablity if done right. In ME1 it was flawed but still added a lot to the lasting appeal. It is outdated, but so is collecting cards (sports, fantasy etc.) and people still get addicted to it.

Sometimes you dont need to invent a new wheel, just make it rounder.

Modifié par Vena_86, 09 mars 2010 - 11:06 .

[Terror_K]

Just because it fits the definition of an RPG doesn't mean it does a good job at pulling it off. While Mass Effect 2 is a good game, I don't think its a very good RPG. It's far too shallow and superficial, even compared to the original game which wasn't exactly a hardcore RPG in the first place.

[Babu Yagu]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

Taxonomical wrote...
I think it's the concern that many (rightfully) have about how anything with a hitpoint bar and an experience level is being called an RPG nowadays. While I love ME2, I have to admit that it lacks many of the features that make a game an RPG. 

Certainly a story is one of them, but any brain dead troglodyte with the ability to process sound into words can follow a story. RPG'ers crave a more stimulating challenge. This is where the "numbers" part of that comes in.

If all someone wants is a riveting plot, then they'd best be served reading a book rather than playing a video game. RPG'ers want strategy, complexity, and challenge.

I think people are kind of forgetting what the core of a RPG was about and biting their teeth in the rules-sets.
The numbers are a means to many players and not ever one who plays an RPG does so with the same motivation and desires.

Strategy, complexity and challenge can be done without a big loot or pure numbers.
Strategy is how you use the available resources/assets you have in the situation you end up in, which works with both limited and abundant availability.
Complexity can either be how much options are or can be open to you or how difficult the system is to comprehend.
Challenge is purely a gameplay design issue and is so for any game.

In the end I can only look at what I myself would regard an RPG.
Does it have a story that integrates the player and what he does, does it allow you a level of control over the way your character acts and looks, does it allow your character to progress in ability and strengths as the game progresses (a leveling system in essence). In essence I would call ME 2 a RPG. Perhaps it is lacking in certain departments, but I would find it hard to not call it an RPG.

Original post was just saying that there was not enough loot. Don't need to add so much that gameplay is set off balance. But what would be wrong with finding the odd bit of Uber Armour. I supose the look of the armour is the thing i'd like to change most of all.

That and bring back the original dance moves. Shepard realy lost his/her confidence on the dance floor. Maybe resurection will do that.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Terror_K wrote...

Just because it fits the definition of an RPG doesn't mean it does a good job at pulling it off. While Mass Effect 2 is a good game, I don't think its a very good RPG. It's far too shallow and superficial, even compared to the original game which wasn't exactly a hardcore RPG in the first place.

I consider the renovation of generic RPG mechanics anything but shallow.

[Murmillos]

Massadonious1 wrote...

Taxonomical wrote...
RPG'ers want strategy, complexity, and challenge.

All of which you can only get by rummaging through every concievable storage container to find an epic sword of badness that someone forgot in their home when the inevitable invasion came, apparently.

Look, I'm a RPG dude too, but what bugs me is everyone seems to have this preconcieved notion of what an RPG should be. When a hybrid such as ME2 hits, you all don't know what to do with yourself. What do you mean I only have 4 class skills? Why can't I upgrade my strength? Where's my +2 damage to Geth mod? Why can't I spend 10 minutes omni-gel'ing everything?

When I hear people say "I love the game, but" that screams to me that you don't like the game simply because you don't like it. You don't like it because it's different. Breaking the standard RPG model and progressing the genre is not a bad thing.

ME2 is a great game if you are willing to ignore that ME1 exists. If you are fond of even of some of the manual RPG mechanics we all recognize - ME2 just take that away from you and goes 'NO! BAD RPG'er! No longer shall you think, you shall just do!'

ME1 had some fundamental loot flaws; the fix SHOULD have been a culling of 90% of the glut and junk re-textured weapons (and armor).

If ME1 never existed and ME2 was the only ME game we all played, then the loot threads would not be as vocal as they are.

Modifié par Murmillos, 09 mars 2010 - 11:55 .

[Costin_Razvan]

ME2 is a great game if you are willing to ignore that ME1 exists. If
you are fond of even of some of the manual RPG mechanics we all
recognize - ME2 just take that away from you and goes 'NO! BAD RPG'er! No longer shall you think, you shall just do!'

ME1 had some fundamental loot flaws; the fix SHOULD have been a culling of 90% of the glut and junk re-textured weapons.

If ME1 never existed and ME2 was the only ME game we all played, then the loot threads would not be as vocal as they are.

Yes, cause equiping your characters with items required SOOO much thinking. That's a bunch of bull****.

The old inventory sistem was ****ing anoying for any person who had the two neurons needed to understand what was good and what wasn't.

In my first playthrough of another RPG I would find out what items were good and what items simply sucjed. In consequent playthroughs I would go on a pre-determined path on equiping my characters with certain items, because that was simply the best way. Sure I could have used different items, get another look and all that, but it simply didn't make my characters as strong as they are.

Take for example Dragon Age Origins: Everyone knows Starfang and Warden Commander Armor are the best for a warrior, everyone know what Staff and Cloth Armor is best for a mage and everyone knows where to find the best bow in game. It is no surpsise that in most videos on youtube you see people in mostly the same armor fighting the archdemon. As you can see people with the same armor/weapons in most ME1 videos.

So what's the ****ing point of the inventory sistem if you are just going to end up using the same items at the end? 

That said, ME1 had something which I LIKED for an inventory sistem, the ability to put weapon and armor mods. It was a shame to have them removed, but then again it wasn't a game breaking change, and I could hardly care less about it ( Though I would hope to have it back in ME3 )

For people who complain I would like to point out that most reviewing sites ( Gamespot, GiantBomb, IGN, Game Trailers, Fox News Weekly ) have people who have played games for many damned years, and they put them to write the reviews and the vast majority of them gave a big thumbs up to the removal of the Inventory Sistem.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 09 mars 2010 - 12:10 .

[Killian Kalthorne]

You know. I played ME1 over a hundred times It is fun finding random odds and bits after a fight and going over the enemies' belongings. I have played ME2 once. Only once. After that I went back to Fallout 3.



As for reviewing sites, I don't care. I don't care if the game got the perfect score in every single gaming site there is. If I don't find it fun to play I won't play it. I've beatenthe game once and shelved it. It just wasn't all that much fun to play.

[Darkhour]

Babu Yagu wrote...

Where is all the LOOT. I used to grind ME1 for days to get the best loot. It wasn't necissary to beat the game but it was a luxury. An extra target to set yourself. Searched for the Heavy Collossus armour for months before i found it. Haven't gone back to ME2 anywhere near as much as ME1.
Please bring back the LOOT for ME3.

I don't exactly know why, but I have an uncontrollable urge to smack you. Good thing this is the internet.

[Costin_Razvan]

What you did doesn't particularly matter. If you don't like the game, then fine, but seriously don't bash it saying it's a bad made game just because you aren't comfortable with the changes they made.

[Killian Kalthorne]

It is a badly made CRPG. Its a fine Gears of War knock off with a bit of lite RPG elements thrown in, but it is a very badly made CRPG.

[Costin_Razvan]

A BIT of RPG elements? You may not know it, but the biggest element of a RPG is the story, not the inventory system. In that regard, as well as Side Questing ( loyalty missions ) and Exploration ME2 is clearly one of the best RPG games of all time.

[EmmaBeeba]

I don't like too much loot. In ME1 you were basically tripping up over upgrades and new weapons. I much prefer a system in which I have to work for upgrades e.t.c by completing missions, though I don't mind a few bits of loot here and there. I preferred the new system in ME2 where a lot of upgrades were a reward for recruiting new members. I'm hoping they can integrate that system more into ME3 - I want to have to work for things, new weapons e.t.c should be reward for going through missions - not just compulsory ones or recruitment missions but sidequests too. My only problem with ME2 was it was just a little too minimalistic. ME3 could fix that by simply providing a lot more stuff to find/earn (just not to the extent ME1 did).

[Killian Kalthorne]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

A BIT of RPG elements? You may not know it, but the biggest element of a RPG is the story, not the inventory system. In that regard, as well as Side Questing ( loyalty missions ) and Exploration ME2 is clearly one of the best RPG games of all time.

Story alone doesn't make a game a CRPG.  Is Heavy Rain a CRPG?  No.  Was Indigo Prophecy?  No.  Both those games have a heavy and deep story but neither were CRPGs.  A CRPG is a combination of elements that creates a game greater than the sum of its parts.  Remove one or two elements you no longer have a CRPG.

As for exploration, I hardly count survey missions as exploration.  If you cannot land on a planet then you aren't truly exploring it.  ME2 is a fine Gears of War knock off with lite RPG elements, but it is not a real CRPG like its predecessor.  Dragon Age is a CRPG.  Neverwinter Nights is a CRPG.  Mass Effect 1 is a CRPG.  Even Fallout 3 is a CRPG.

Mass Effect 2 is not.

[jack3auer]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

A BIT of RPG elements? You may not know it, but the biggest element of a RPG is the story, not the inventory system. In that regard, as well as Side Questing ( loyalty missions ) and Exploration ME2 is clearly one of the best RPG games of all time.

exactly the story of ME2 is what makes the game.   Gears of War?   what were your squad mates called again????   good fun sure.  but to say ME2 is a rip off if GofW is just plain trolling.

[Killian Kalthorne]

The story is good, I will not deny that, but story alone does not make a game a CRPG.