1067 réponses à ce sujet

[Razyx]

Pocketgb wrote...

There is one chief thing that makes this really hard to compare ME1 to ME2 that both of us forgot, and that's there are multiple defenses as opposed to just shields and health. Because of that what it really comes down to is not which one is more beneficial since that's near impossible given how different they are. I personally liked how they were done in ME2, but that means next to nothing.

Of course, this doesn't mean you can't advocate for further weapon
customization, i.e. rate of fire, clip size and all that.

Indeed they are differents. It's not bad to make a call for more and better  
Both have their strengths, if possible take the best of them would be a point to consider.

In that specific part of your post, we were talking about weapon and armor customization and how I felt there was very little of both in ME1. In regards to why, it's because all gear followed a progression from best to worst.

ok , thanks, I misunderstood. Agree that there were a relative variety but the illusion at times, although minimal, is better than something invariable.

[DocDVD]

ME2 is no RPG, plain an simple. I've been playing RPGs since Ultima II came out so I think I have a bit of a perspective on RPGs.

The only grip I had with ME1 was the combat (I play action heavy games as well), so I hoped that part would be improved in ME2. Well, improved it is but everything that I liked in ME1 seems to have been sacrificed for it.

ME1 was a RPG with great story and some shooter elements
ME2 is a shooter with an interesting story and some rudimental RPG elements

If they combine the RPG part from ME1 and the combat from ME2 for Mass Effect 3 that would make one hell of a game. Unfortunately I don't think this will happen an we will get another shooter which pretends to be a RPG.

I enjoyed playing ME2, but I can't see myself playing it four times like ME1 - in fact I still have to find the drive to play ME2 with my adept (I liked the "old" adept way better). So for me the replay value is smaller than ME1 which puts ME2 in the one-playthrough-shooter shelf for me.

[Massadonious1]

I've been playing video games since Pong and my opinion is the one opinion to rule them all.

[SkullandBonesmember]

EternalWolfe wrote...

Really, this whole rpg arguement needs to stop - there is no set definition of an RPG, and people's definition of an RPG seems to be limited to what they like out of other titles that are labeled RPGs. Like the inventory from another RPG? Well, that must mean inventory is a MUST for an RPG. Like the character devolopment? Yep, you guessed it, sure throw that in.

In the end, it just becomes an endless arguement about personal definitions and likes about previous RPGs someone has played. "It should have it because its supposed to be an RPG" is a fallen argument if no one can agree on a definition, because then it becomes an argument about the definition of an RPG.

I would think that discussing the elements themselves and how they might be improved upon to more fit your like would be a better way to get progress then just saying "It needs this to be an RPG". Not that that's going to turn out any better, I suppose.

*sigh* Whatever.

I don't care if the game is plot or character driven. But Mass Effect 2 was neither, both aspects overall suffer because of the focus on combat.

[The Capital Gaultier]

ME2 is above all else an RPG. There's no denying it.

[Never]

Apparently there's lots of denying it XD

I liked both games, but like DocDVD said, I could replay ME1 more than ME2, that's for sure. Even though I love the new combat! Both games are great, I'll just keep my fingers crossed for ME3.

[Terror_K]

The Capital Gaultier wrote...

ME2 is above all else an RPG. There's no denying it.

An RPG, yes. A good RPG though... that can be (and has been) debated.

[MarloMarlo]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...
I don't care if the game is plot or character driven. But Mass Effect 2 was neither, both aspects overall suffer because of the focus on combat.

Oh? Did the people in charge of the plot and characters get reassigned to combat system design before they were able to make a good plot and good characters? Did they have a significant chunk of their budget given to the combat designers? Were the plot and characters sacrificed on the altar of more or better combat at any point that you can identify?

Or do you just know because you know.

[Kalfear]

mynameisdanza wrote...

Apparently there's lots of denying it XD
I liked both games, but like DocDVD said, I could replay ME1 more than ME2, that's for sure. Even though I love the new combat! Both games are great, I'll just keep my fingers crossed for ME3.

Yup, I replayed ME1 10 times before it got to repeatative.

ME2 I have played 1.5 times and its now on the sidelines while I play FF13 and then DA:O expansion.

Usually I at least finish current play through of a game before I start a different game but sadly ME2 just isnt a GOOD RPG.
Ive tried to be productive and helpful by making thread I link to in my signature but after reading Christina Normans power point presentation I kinda find myself asking "why bother". Pretty clear shes not interested in the facts and what people have to say as shes DEVELOPED or CREATED her own version of a really twisted and reworked truth on whats being said about the game and what people asking for.
Dont think I have read one thread dedicated to improving ME2 combat (and ive lost count how many threads about missing RPG elements been made) but she lists combat reworking/fixes/upgrades ahead of and more important then fixing the missing RPG elements for ME3. (sighs) Some people just wanna hear what they wanna hear and refuse to hear otherwise it seems.

Anyways, agree, ME2 has almost no replayability. I have already decided to cut my 10 saved games from 1st ME to 3 saved games for ME2 and not even sure I can play ME2 enough to fullfill that order. Game is like FF13, linear and once you finished, you finished.
Unlike ME1 and DA:O where you manipulate the final outcome so much you can replay over and over and get a different final result (besides who you banging that is. Romance might matter if it was scripted and programed for 13 year olds in ME2) were great games and well designed for replayability!
ME2 and Final Fantasy 13 are just linear, follow the path till finished games where you play once and move on normally.

I should point out im probably enjoying FF13 more then ME2. FF13 is a weaker game (better graphics) over all but thats always been the case with FF games so they living up to their pedesessors. They meeting expectation. Linear game, strong but confussing stories, rated T so you dont expect adult content. Square Enix didnt falsely advertise the game. Sure the combat simplistic but the game is about the story, combat isnt the focus of a RPG (or not suppose to be) and thankfully my characters get stronger and better in combat as they go up in skills and levels (like is suppose to happen in RPGS. You dont just start with twitch combat).
ME2 did NOT live up to the hype created by ME1. It was a weaker and flawed game.
If it wasnt for Drews EXCELLENT novels, ME1, and the fantastic comics, id be done and finished with Mass Effect to be honest. But ME2 is the odd duck of low quality in a world of high quality products so im hoping ME2 just a blip and we return to the higher standards created by the other merchandise regarding Mass Effect.

Modifié par Kalfear, 17 mars 2010 - 09:53 .

[Murmillos]

Gatt9 wrote...

nelly21 wrote...

@Murmillos

I will win because my argument is based on fact and yours is based on emotion.

I ask for an explanation because your definitions for what constitutes an rpg are more variable than a color palette at Loews.

Actually,  you won't,  because it's pretty apparent you have no idea what an RPG is.  So let's get started.

And you are just as clueless.. I'm glad you have single set definitions which you have clearly decided which make up an RPG for YOU.

[FutureBoy81]

i must admit when this title was first announced like around 05 i think it was, i was just so excited for it, it was one of of the first games in a while that promised everything ive wanted in video games and in truth got me interested again after a long hiatus (actually purchased 360 just for it),



to be honest the first time i played Mass effect i was blown away by the sheer scope of it but couldnt help but notice some things where missing, but because it was a trilogy i had hope that these things would become rectified for the second outing, long and behold instead of improving on the aspects that made Mass effect such a stand out game, they completed gutted it and started from scratch and built an entirely different game just in the same universe, all im saying is ill keep an eye out for the third one but im not putting nearly as much effort as getting the game as i was for the first two ..

[Andorfiend]

Kalfear wrote...

Ive tried to be productive and helpful by making thread I link to in my signature but after reading Christina Normans power point presentation I kinda find myself asking "why bother". Pretty clear shes not interested in the facts and what people have to say as shes DEVELOPED or CREATED her own version of a really twisted and reworked truth on whats being said about the game and what people asking for.
Dont think I have read one thread dedicated to improving ME2 combat (and ive lost count how many threads about missing RPG elements been made) but she lists combat reworking/fixes/upgrades ahead of and more important then fixing the missing RPG elements for ME3. (sighs) Some people just wanna hear what they wanna hear and refuse to hear otherwise it seems.

Umm... Christina's presentation was about the process of moving from ME 1 to ME 2. It has little to nothing on  ME 3 development so I don't know where you got that idea. If as you say the combat has been perfected in ME 2 (and I disagree personally, I want my damn radar screen back and I don't like binary defenses for biotic powers) then what else do they have to work on for ME 3 but characters and story and RPG elements? Under her goals for ME 3 the number one item is 'Richer RPG features.'

I agree that ME 2 was on rails, I hated that. I agree that the story was weaker, although mostly I ended the game really wishing I had been allowed to give the Illusive man the hot lead enema he so desperately deserves. But I also understand that many (if not all) of the problems with ME 2 were a result of the fact that the game is part of a trilogy that preserves your decisions in the later games. Do you have any idea how complex that makes Biowares jobs? Let me fill you in. The number of possible states they have to take into account when building ME 3 is n^x where n is the number of decisions and x is the number of choices. So if you had 20 binary decisions that means ME 3 has to account for 2^20 or 1,048,576 different possible states just coming into it. And there were more decisions than that and not all of them are binary. Do you follow? They are scripting for millions of possible entry states into ME 3, god only knows how. So of course they had to limit the number of variable you throw into the mix in ME 2. I think they still could have managed not to makes us feel like we were on rails because they didn't trust us, but they are trying something that has never been done before, and I hope you can see why. They are doing hero's work. (Pizza eating computer geek style heros, but still heros. )

Modifié par Andorfiend, 17 mars 2010 - 12:39 .

[Apollo Starflare]

Not much to add to a topic that has been debated for so long now there were cave paintings discovered depicting the two sides, however I am somewhat amazed that some people in this thread were complaining about a free downloadable heavy weapon that adds something different to the mix.
If it cost something I would understand, or if it came at the sacrifice of other content, sure. But really, that gun probably didn't take that long to set up as DLC, it was just a little something new to tide us over before the Firewalker pack... They could hardly have pumped out anything story related in the same timeframe.

I fully support more story/narrative based content in the future, but until the Firewalker pack and Kasumi have been released i'm going to be patient. It's a little much to expect any ME2-3 bridging DLC yet, the game hasn't even been out for 2 months yet! Oh and I'm sure it must have come up somewhere, but in her GDC presentation Christina Norman mentioned they would be looking at the RPG side of things in regards to ME3, so we can all stop worrying now, right?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Murmillos wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Correct.  Effectively zero player input in both games.  Both games fail to be RPGs on this point.

In what context?  Going by all your "rules" and "requirements", there isn't a single computer RPG game that could be considered an RPG.

Why do people keep saying this?  I've even offered examples of games I think are good RPGs.  BioWare has made several of them.

A game like DAO or KotOR offers player choice by allowing you control over your character's moment-to-moment decisions in conversation.  What your character says or does is under your control, within the options written by the designers.

ME does not offer this, because the player isn't told what his character is going to say or do as a result of his selection from the dialogue wheel.  Because we're given only paraphrased options that don't come close to capturing the detail of the consequent action or utterance, we're unable to make any fine distinctions at all as we play Shepard.

Designing Shepard's personality in advance is impossible, because Shepard is guaranteed to act out of character routinely throughout the game.

[Murmillos]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Correct.  Effectively zero player input in both games.  Both games fail to be RPGs on this point.

In what context?  Going by all your "rules" and "requirements", there isn't a single computer RPG game that could be considered an RPG.

Why do people keep saying this?  I've even offered examples of games I think are good RPGs.  BioWare has made several of them.

A game like DAO or KotOR offers player choice by allowing you control over your character's moment-to-moment decisions in conversation.  What your character says or does is under your control, within the options written by the designers.

ME does not offer this, because the player isn't told what his character is going to say or do as a result of his selection from the dialogue wheel.  Because we're given only paraphrased options that don't come close to capturing the detail of the consequent action or utterance, we're unable to make any fine distinctions at all as we play Shepard.

Designing Shepard's personality in advance is impossible, because Shepard is guaranteed to act out of character routinely throughout the game.

Those are faults in the game that prevents YOU from enjoying the game as an RPG - by your decreed laws, rules, and regulations; but that doesn't mean that ME2 isn't an RPG overall.

[Chuck_Vu]

I have an idea.. 

Read this :  http://members.cox.n...r/munchkins.htm

Then go back and re-read some of these post.   Remember what you learned from the above link.  The end result is humorous.

Modifié par Chuck_Vu, 17 mars 2010 - 10:41 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Murmillos wrote...

Those are faults in the game that prevents YOU from enjoying the game as an RPG - by your decreed laws, rules, and regulations

Yes, because I can't roleplay in it.  And neither can you.

but that doesn't mean that ME2 isn't an RPG overall.

What would the game need to be to cease being an RPG in your eyes?  You're defending the game, saying it's an RPG, but you're not telling us why you think so.

It doesn't allow roleplaying.  It allows you to choose (broadly) what sort of protagonist you're watching, but there's no ability at all to flesh out his personality and have that affect his decisions.

To take an example from ME1, Shepard's a Spectre.  How does he feel about that?  Why does he feel that way?  What does he think the role of a Spectre is?  The answers to these questions can only be provided by you, the player, and they should (if Shepard has anything approaching a realistic personality) influence a great many decisions he makes during the mission.  But the way ME is constructed it simply isn't possible for you to play the game like that.  You can't make choices on Shepard's behalf that would suit the answers to those questions because you're never allowed to select or exclude specific options based on their content.

Roleplaying in Mass Effect is like painting with a Sherman tank.  You aim in the general direction of your canvas and hope that everything is still alive when you're done.

[OneDrunkMonk]

In my books I think ME2 needed the skill tree back and the ability to give effective squad commands (or dare I say even a gambit system). Additionally I wish Biotics didn't get nerfed and seemingly replaced with more guns (must all games be like COD: Modern Warfare?)



I do like how ME2 tightened up and focused on what Shepard really needed to do as oppose to roving around planets looking for Turian insignias. I also like the cleaned up inventory, though why I can't use any ammo type I desire is beyond me.

[Murmillos]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

Those are faults in the game that prevents YOU from enjoying the game as an RPG - by your decreed laws, rules, and regulations

Yes, because I can't roleplay in it.  And neither can you.

but that doesn't mean that ME2 isn't an RPG overall.

What would the game need to be to cease being an RPG in your eyes?  You're defending the game, saying it's an RPG, but you're not telling us why you think so.

It doesn't allow roleplaying.  It allows you to choose (broadly) what sort of protagonist you're watching, but there's no ability at all to flesh out his personality and have that affect his decisions.

To take an example from ME1, Shepard's a Spectre.  How does he feel about that?  Why does he feel that way?  What does he think the role of a Spectre is?  The answers to these questions can only be provided by you, the player, and they should (if Shepard has anything approaching a realistic personality) influence a great many decisions he makes during the mission.  But the way ME is constructed it simply isn't possible for you to play the game like that.  You can't make choices on Shepard's behalf that would suit the answers to those questions because you're never allowed to select or exclude specific options based on their content.

Roleplaying in Mass Effect is like painting with a Sherman tank.  You aim in the general direction of your canvas and hope that everything is still alive when you're done.

I have a question, what about all the cRPG's that came before "choice"? Where all your avatar did was just select pre-written text after pre-written text? Are those not RPGs? Or were those just adventure games that mimicked the RPG's elements and we are all delusional for thinking they are RPGs?

I've already stated before and time and time again, RPG's can not be made up by a single element, but the sum of its parts. Yes ME is painting with a Sherman tank as you can't make Shepard 100% 'your' Shepard, as you play as him within a very narrow narrative told role; but it is still a role.

Not sure where I remember this from, but people have joked before that ME is the start of a new RPG subset. "Opera RPG"..

Ultimately, RPG's can only be described and painted by a broad brush of elements that all work together - and the better they work together in allowing you to describe and play a role, the better the RPG is. You, like many others, are trying to dictate what RPG's are using a .5mm mechanical pencil - when many of the required elements never existed for cRPG's except for the past 10 years.

Again, yes you are correct, ME paints a very narrow and predetermined role for the player to play - but often, many cRPGs have done just that, but the narrow role had never come into primary focus to the player, as it now has become for ME.

Modifié par Murmillos, 17 mars 2010 - 11:47 .

[Nick Fox]

What amazes me to no avain is that people call this an Rpg!? Really its a damn shooter on rails with a tad little bit of rpg elemnts thrown in there, thats all imo. Not a particulary great one either in thats regard.
Not bad mind you , but way off when it comes to the attention this crap has got from Ign etc.

Modifié par Nick Fox, 18 mars 2010 - 12:41 .

[Jaysonie]

Nick Fox wrote...

What amazes me to no avain is that people call this an Rpg!? Really its a damn shooter on rails with a tad little bit of rpg elemnts thrown in there, thats all imo. Not a particulary great one either in thats regard.
Not bad mind you , but way off when it comes to the attention this crap has got from Ign etc.

Many, many people disagree with this and your likely to get flamed because you dont provide any argument. Might be more helpfull.

[Elvhen Veluthil]

Ok, here is a question to all of you that say that ME2 is a game that can be defined as a RPG (not just having RPG elements, a lot of games these days have RPG elements), is Bioshock 1 a RPG or not?

[Jaysonie]

Elvhen Veluthil wrote...

Ok, here is a question to all of you that say that ME2 is a game that can be defined as a RPG (not just having RPG elements, a lot of games these days have RPG elements), is Bioshock 1 a RPG or not?

You role play as shepard. You are shepard and you decide what course of action he/she takes threw out the game. You dont get that type of freedom from bioshock. So no, bioshock is not an rpg.

Modifié par Jaysonie, 18 mars 2010 - 12:54 .

[Elvhen Veluthil]

Jaysonie wrote...

Elvhen Veluthil wrote...

Ok, here is a question to all of you that say that ME2 is a game that can be defined as a RPG (not just having RPG elements, a lot of games these days have RPG elements), is Bioshock 1 a RPG or not?

You role play as shepard. You are shepard and you decide what course of action he/she takes threw out the game. You dont get that type of freedom from bioshock. So no, bioshock is not an rpg.

Believe me, you can finish the game without doing any reading. Just press randomly any dialog choice you like.

[Nick Fox]

Jaysonie wrote...

Nick Fox wrote...

What amazes me to no avain is that people call this an Rpg!? Really its a damn shooter on rails with a tad little bit of rpg elemnts thrown in there, thats all imo. Not a particulary great one either in thats regard.
Not bad mind you , but way off when it comes to the attention this crap has got from Ign etc.

Many, many people disagree with this and your likely to get flamed because you dont provide any argument. Might be more helpfull.

Oh i stated in lots of threads my position on the subject, if you care to read em (wich i doubt you do) and in this one too if I remember correctly. If you dont care to read all the arguments that is in this thread alone, then i see no point in speaking to you at all. Oh and if the so called role of shepard is enough to call this an rpg you are sadly misstaken. Start reading is my advice or you could just go on loving this and  belive its an rpg for all i care.