874 réponses à ce sujet

[Onyx Jaguar]

Man there is so many recently released games with the words "rpg" tacked on that the term is meaningless.



The evolution from DND to Wizardry/Rogue/Ultima to Dragon Quest/Final Fantasy to Pool Of Radiance/Eye of the Beholder to Elder Scrolls/Baldur's Gate/Fallout to Deus Ex/KOTOR to whatever



The term RPG is meaningless when it applies to games because it more or less applies to anything regarding stat manipulation and character building.



In fact, I would argue that the deepest RPG's are sports games. Because in reality they pretty much are. I'd get laughed at, but if you look at the workings of Madden, MVP Baseball/MLB The Show, Fifa, and hell even 2K's/EA's basketball games they have all of the RPG tropes in abundance except for story manipulation, but even then you could argue about that to. Its pointless.

[exxxed]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Man there is so many recently released games with the words "rpg" tacked on that the term is meaningless.

The evolution from DND to Wizardry/Rogue/Ultima to Dragon Quest/Final Fantasy to Pool Of Radiance/Eye of the Beholder to Elder Scrolls/Baldur's Gate/Fallout to Deus Ex/KOTOR to whatever

The term RPG is meaningless when it applies to games because it more or less applies to anything regarding stat manipulation and character building.

In fact, I would argue that the deepest RPG's are sports games. Because in reality they pretty much are. I'd get laughed at, but if you look at the workings of Madden, MVP Baseball/MLB The Show, Fifa, and hell even 2K's/EA's basketball games they have all of the RPG tropes in abundance except for story manipulation, but even then you could argue about that to. Its pointless.

 Well basically the RPG term is flawed, because most of the so called RPG's either fall in one of two categories D&D (Baldur's Gate, Diablo, Dungeon Siege) or AD&D ( The Witcher, KoTOR games).
 
 Anyway, RPG is in fact a game which lets you play the role THAT YOU CHOSE, and evolving as the storyy advances...

[Shallina]

First step we turned off the RPG system. for ME2.



First step for ME3 they will turn off the combat system, not put anything back in it, and sell the game.



If you want the RPG system or combat system for ME3 you'll have to buy them as DLC. Just like ME2 with the custom cloth.



Bioware was great, but EA bought them. Awakening first Bioware game I didn't want to buy not evenchecked the release date. Will it be the same for their next game ?

[exxxed]

Shallina wrote...

First step we turned off the RPG system. for ME2.

First step for ME3 they will turn off the combat system, not put anything back in it, and sell the game.

If you want the RPG system or combat system for ME3 you'll have to buy them as DLC. Just like ME2 with the custom cloth.

Bioware was great, but EA bought them. Awakening first Bioware game I didn't want to buy not evenchecked the release date. Will it be the same for their next game ?

As funny as this is, hmmm...

Don't give them any ideas, or they will just add them if people are stupid enough... buying for two bucks a set of textures which the modres can do in a heart beat... 

[Darth Drago]

Shallina wrote...

Awakening first Bioware game I didn't want to buy not evenchecked the release date. Will it be the same for their next game ?

-I doubt I’ll buy Awakenings, not at least until I see how big and long the expansion is. It seems a bit spendy at $40.

[Warlock Angel22]

Listen Bioware, don't listen to any of these people, including me.



Now, here's my suggestions:



I have to say first I believe ME 2 is an improvement over ME 1 in every way and I love ME 1. By sayin that, it doesn't mean that I'm a ME 2 fanboy. ME 2 was great but it could have been better. ME 1 was great but had a lot of flaws. Those flaws were fixed in ME 2. Now ME 2 has flaws that need to be fixed and my hope is that we don't go back and fight the same war.



I don't want to see Bioware spending its resources reimagining the inventory and battle system for ME 3. If you love role-playing then you must admit that the most important thing is the story. Do fans really want Bioware to be focused on a crouch system or adding more dialogue for Shepard and the crew? Do you want Bioware focused on heat sinks and cool down systems or do you want them to spend time and MONEY on designing worlds (Terra Nova, please) and expanding stations (Citadel and Omega).



Like someone pointed out earlier, people have their preferences and I don't think all the discussion in the world will change that. But if you deliver a game with lots of interesting missions and places to visit then you will draw people in.



The reason I role play Mass Effect is because it's finally giving me a space rpg experience that I can't find anywhere else. I get to be in the military, meet alien races on alien worlds and make love to alien girls. How cool is that? When did people forget about the fun of role-playing? I don't need a new weapon, I need a new mission. A new mission that will allow me to play around in this great play ground that was created by Bioware. Many of us understand that Bioware does not have unlimited resources, so you have to ask, what do you want those resources spent on?



Suggestions that may please everyone, but probably not:



I like the weapon upgrade system because it was a universal upgrade. Real life armies don't equip their armies with a 100 different weapon types. It would make ammo distribution and upkeep a nightmare. Better to have four AR that have tactical use the entire game than twenty AR that all become obsolete once the mega weapon is found. Better to just allow for attachments like better scopes, silencers and larger clips. Resident Evil 5 had a nice upgrade system imo and kept the weapon load out reasonable.



The armor load out is fine. More N7 pieces would be nice and an alliance armor with alliance casual attire would be nice. I was fine with the squad attire because it gave you that "Dirty Dozen" feel and enhanced their individuality. A bulky space suit should never touch Miranda's assets. But if you could design an armor suit like Tali's for Miranda then that wouldn't be bad. Basically everyone could have a one battle suit that's specific to their character.



Please leave the Mako on the scrap heap. Hopefully the hovertank will be a good replacement. Personally I could do without a vehicle, I rather explore a large interesting planet environment on foot than explore a barren planet in a vehicle. but if we do have a vehicle, create more Noveria type missions where it's actually useful.



Expand the Citadel, Omega and Ilium. It would be nice if Shepard had a condo in one of these places btw. More involved missions in these places would really open it up. Solving the murder on Omega and going undercover was a good start in the right direction.



At the end of the day, spend more money on missions and mission designs and spend what's left over on minor tweaks...



well, tweak the hell out the mining mini-game. I wouldn't dump it completely because you would have to spend money on building something totally new that people wouldn't like. Best to just make it faster or at least map "auto-mine" to the A button since it's not being used. Hell, Edi is an advanced AI, why am I manually mining a planet? Oh, put a value on the mined material so that we can trade it on Ilium like oil. Two cents per unit of Iridium, you get the point. That gives people the choice to use the mined minerals for upgrades or sell it for money to buy new items.



Last thing that I hope for. Bring at least three or four party characters from each previous game. Example; Garrus, Tali, Liara from ME1 and Legion, Miranda, Jack from ME 2. Then you could fill out the rest of the squad with new characters.



I think that's all.

[Mimaiselphenai]

Pocketgb wrote...


You point out bluntly that this was a problem introduced into ME2.

Being upset at the lack of control options due to the game also being tailored for consoles is understandable. Being bummed at the lack of crouching - while there are few situations where I can think of it actually being beneficial in ME2 - is also understandable.

Surfacing a problem that also clearly existed in ME1 and hinting that it's something new in ME2 is just being a bit unfair. That's all that I'm saying.

It IS a problem that ME2 introduced, guy. The reason it was far less
frequent or non existent (for me at least) in 1 is because you didn't
SLIDE into cover. That's the problem. If they're going to keep the slide feature, then storm and cover usage should be on a different keybind.

[Elvis_Mazur]

If Bioware really listen to what these people post here, they would already be crazy

[slyguy07]

Actually I am just poking Marlo for reactions at this point. Lol. Sorry I should stop, but the last couple of posts have been entertaining. In all seriousness people want to drag RPG from the very first of the games with that genre name up to today. Comparing RPGs like Fallout to today's RPG's just shouldn't be done. Technology limited the old games and who knows what else they may have included. I remember playing Everquest and thinking "wow it's actually 3d" and all that. Fun game for it's time and highly addictive. Unfortunately it helped build the momentum that lead to MMORPG's evolution that became WoW. Loot has become an integral part of almost all RPG's today in part because of that. I don't know if Diablo started it, but it had to start somewhere.



The primary part of a roleplaying game is just that: you play the role of a character and/or specific person of title. That is why so many games like Bioshock get the genre title simply because of that fact right there. Plot is central to that because somewhere in that plot is the role your character plays. Sometimes it is predetermined and in some games it's up to you to define that role. Most games branch out into multiple paths these days.



What people are upset about is how the secondary elements typically associated with an RPG today just vanished in ME2. Basically inventory, a wide variety of powers, stat systems(that you can actually see) etc. I seriously don't know what to expect in ME3, but I do know most people felt the story was a let down from simple observation in these forums and from polls. The story to ME1 was awesome and the atmosphere and feel to the game was unique. The only time I actually felt that same feeling in ME2 was on the Citadel or the bars and Omega.



Also the lack of customization in ME2 was shallow. ME1 was just as bad, but it had more than ME2 simply because of the weapon and armor slots upgrades having noticeable effects unlike the N7 armor. The color schemes and patterns were a very nice touch. I just wish there had been more.

[Pocketgb]

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

It IS a problem that ME2 introduced, guy. The reason it was far less
frequent or non existent (for me at least) in 1 is because you didn't
SLIDE into cover. That's the problem. If they're going to keep the slide feature, then storm and cover usage should be on a different keybind.

Okay, what do you mean about the slide feature? Now you're capitalizing it as though there's a big difference.

Is it the fact that when you want to get into cover - which is now rather frequently in ME2 - you get into it quicker and sooner? Because that's something I really wish was still there in ME1.

Storming has always been tough in TPS games. Unless the 360 magically gets a new button, things'll be pretty limited. But then, does the left thumbstick do anything significant? If that's the case they don't have too much of an excuse in this regards.

Still better than ME1, imo.

[Pocketgb]

slyguy07 wrote...

What people are upset about is how the secondary elements typically associated with an RPG today just vanished in ME2. Basically inventory, a wide variety of powers, stat systems(that you can actually see) etc. I seriously don't know what to expect in ME3, but I do know most people felt the story was a let down from simple observation in these forums and from polls. The story to ME1 was awesome and the atmosphere and feel to the game was unique. The only time I actually felt that same feeling in ME2 was on the Citadel or the bars and Omega.

This comes back to what I'm saying: How much, of one thing, is enough?

In regards to powers: how many powers does a game need to be qualified as having an RPG element? Even though they can be used much more frequently, how does ME2 having less powers than ME1 detract from it being a role-playing game? Does having less abilities not put focus on the fewer that you have?

In regards to "stat systems": What do you mean, the skill tree? Because this most certainly exists in ME2 as well. It's just not the same as ME1's. How does ME2 lose out on being a role-playing game because of how the system was change from ME1? Because you can't upgrade weapon proficiencies? What's wrong with that?

In regards to the custimization: How much custimization does the armor need to have to warrant being an RPG? In ME2 there are a ton of different combinations you can come up with: you can adjust the helmet, shoulder, arms, chest, and leg slots. In ME1 you could only change two for the armor. In ME1 there were a lot of choices, in ME2

Weapon custimization was probably the only thing I felt that was lost from the switch, but at least we have variety in weapon choice.

The inventory: What does the existence of an inventory provide? Why is
it really needed?


Whoops, sorry about DP!

Modifié par Pocketgb, 22 mars 2010 - 10:44 .

[Terror_K]

Too many seemed to be concerned with what defines an RPG and not enough of what gives an RPG depth and substance. Just because Mass Effect 2 fits the basic definition of an RPG, doesn't mean its a deep one with enough RPG meat and bones to satisfy the hungry RPG fan. Things aren't so black and white as to mean that if a game succeeds in being defined as an RPG that it succeeds at being an RPG.

[Pocketgb]

Terror_K wrote...

Too many seemed to be concerned with what defines an RPG and not enough of what gives an RPG depth and substance.

Precisely, hence my post above yours.

[Murmillos]

Saving the long debates from the people whom can't understand them, I'm again here to back up Terror_K and Packetgb.



ME2 excels at a game, but it fails as a deep fulfilling RPG. Maybe some of those aspects are tedious and sometimes boring - but not everything should be instant gratification. But I guess many kids don't know what that is anymore. Everything is on the "Me, Myself, I & Now" demanding attitude.

[Andaius20]

I'll throw in behind Terror K too.

[Chala]

Andaius20 wrote...

I'll throw in behind Terror K too.

me too

[Mimaiselphenai]

Pocketgb wrote...

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

It IS a problem that ME2 introduced, guy. The reason it was far less
frequent or non existent (for me at least) in 1 is because you didn't
SLIDE into cover. That's the problem. If they're going to keep the slide feature, then storm and cover usage should be on a different keybind.

Okay, what do you mean about the slide feature? Now you're capitalizing it as though there's a big difference.

Is it the fact that when you want to get into cover - which is now rather frequently in ME2 - you get into it quicker and sooner? Because that's something I really wish was still there in ME1.

Storming has always been tough in TPS games. Unless the 360 magically gets a new button, things'll be pretty limited. But then, does the left thumbstick do anything significant? If that's the case they don't have too much of an excuse in this regards.

Still better than ME1, imo.

What I mean is when you use sprint to RETREAT the sliding is an issue. I already said it's a nice feature, but it shouldn't automatic. For two reasons. One, it doesn't happen when you don't want it to, and two if you actually had to press a button to slide into cover while sprinting, it would make cover usage more engaging since it would require timing. As opposed to everything being done for you. That's one thing that makes cover gimmicky in ME2.

[Pocketgb]

Murmillos wrote...

Saving the long debates from the people
whom can't understand them, I'm again here to back up Terror_K and
Packetgb...

You sure? I'd check
my previous post. It states that I feel that ME2's
role-playing elements are emphasized elsewhere and in a different
fashion than ME1's.

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

What I mean is when you use sprint to RETREAT the sliding is an issue. I already said it's a nice feature, but it shouldn't automatic. For two reasons. One, it doesn't happen when you don't want it to, and two if you actually had to press a button to slide into cover while sprinting, it would make cover usage more engaging since it would require timing. As opposed to everything being done for you. That's one thing that makes cover gimmicky in ME2.

That all happens in ME1 as well. You just don't have to press a button for it, it happens automatically.

[Andaius20]

Hmm it never happened to me. Since you actually had to hit and push against the "right" side of "usable" cover to get into cover.

[Pocketgb]

Doing the Rogue VI quest always gets me killed because of my magnetized cover. Back in the day I had to resort to fighting them in the long corridor, taking pot shots and constantly strafing left and right.

[Dudeman315]

I'll back up Terror_K as well.



ME1 every quest: a) rewarded me or not based on my actions not 1000xp per mission. b)Told me about the universe in some way.



This is not the case for ME2. Most(not all) were personal mission for your party that did not enhance the universe as a whole(not all). And since your party only talked to you to give the quest and then stopped, even that felt unrewarding.

[Terror_K]

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

 As opposed to everything being done for you.

I thought I'd single out this comment, simply because I feel this is one of the overall issues I have with ME2 and its oversimplification. And its a problem many games overall these days face I feel, whereby to be made more accessible and not scare of the average gamer of today, a lot of things are just done for you rather than employing any degree of thinking from the player to make their own choices. Sure, some people will say "there's no need... the choice is always obvious" or "that just unnecessarily complicates things" but I feel things have gone too far in this regard and Mass Effect 2 has become one of the casualties of this. Sure, there are those out there that feel that Baldur's Gate and NWN made things too complicated I'm sure, and that games are heading away from this need to micro-manage everything. But there's more freedom in being able to make your own choices, and you feel more like you've personally accomplished things when you make the choices yourself.

The main point is, you can go too far in both directions: too much management and not enough. ME2 is, in my mind, not enough, and this is also due to the fact there's simply not enough stuff out there to manage in the first place as much as it is to the fact that the management is just so simple that it almost does the job itself (and, in some cases, does). Once again we come to the quote "make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler" and the fact that BioWare, I feel, unfortunately crossed that line and did make things "simpler."

[Mimaiselphenai]

Pocketgb wrote...

That all happens in ME1 as well. You just don't have to press a button for it, it happens automatically.

It doesn't. You actually have to press against a wall to use cover in 1. It's independant of the sprint key bind.
And my point is, even if it did happen in one, there was no slide animation. If you "accidentally" used cover, you could just break away again. In 2 you have to survive the slide animation into cover you don't want to use before that's even an option. Hence it shouldn't be on the same key binding.

[Pocketgb]

Dudeman315 wrote...

This is not the case for ME2. Most(not all) were personal mission for your party that did not enhance the universe as a whole(not all). And since your party only talked to you to give the quest and then stopped, even that felt unrewarding.

That's part of the progression of the trilogy. The first was all about expand your knowledge of the franchise. The second assumes you now know what's up, and you're given a mission (that, quite honestly, sounds really impossible) and you're gonna need the best at their best to do it.

And I'm not sure what you mean about you're party not talking to you when you did their quest. Have you spoken to Thane much??

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

It doesn't. You actually have to
press against a wall to use cover in 1. It's independant of the sprint
key bind.

Precisely. And if you're running away, and
there are any walls perpindicular to you, you have a chance to "stick"
to it - which had a pretty good chance of getting you killed, just like
in ME2. That's the point I'M trying to make here.

There is a bit of a difference in the range it takes to
get into cover, though, and in ME1 you had to be closer to use it, in
ME2 you can be a bit further away before you can take cover. However,
this makes it much more easier to advance to further cover.

Mimaiselphenai
wrote...

And my point is, even if it did happen in one, there
was no slide animation. If you "accidentally" used cover, you could just
break away again. In 2 you have to survive the slide animation into
cover you don't want to use before that's even an option. Hence it
shouldn't be on the same key binding.

The answer to solve
both problems in ME1 AND 2 is have the sprint
key indepenant of the take cover key. They can do this by making the
left thumbstick (which was originally crouch, which doesn't exist in the
game) the sprint button.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 23 mars 2010 - 01:17 .

[slyguy07]

Pocketgb wrote...

slyguy07 wrote...

What people are upset about is how the secondary elements typically associated with an RPG today just vanished in ME2. Basically inventory, a wide variety of powers, stat systems(that you can actually see) etc. I seriously don't know what to expect in ME3, but I do know most people felt the story was a let down from simple observation in these forums and from polls. The story to ME1 was awesome and the atmosphere and feel to the game was unique. The only time I actually felt that same feeling in ME2 was on the Citadel or the bars and Omega.

This comes back to what I'm saying: How much, of one thing, is enough?

In regards to powers: how many powers does a game need to be qualified as having an RPG element? Even though they can be used much more frequently, how does ME2 having less powers than ME1 detract from it being a role-playing game? Does having less abilities not put focus on the fewer that you have?

In regards to "stat systems": What do you mean, the skill tree? Because this most certainly exists in ME2 as well. It's just not the same as ME1's. How does ME2 lose out on being a role-playing game because of how the system was change from ME1? Because you can't upgrade weapon proficiencies? What's wrong with that?

In regards to the custimization: How much custimization does the armor need to have to warrant being an RPG? In ME2 there are a ton of different combinations you can come up with: you can adjust the helmet, shoulder, arms, chest, and leg slots. In ME1 you could only change two for the armor. In ME1 there were a lot of choices, in ME2

Weapon custimization was probably the only thing I felt that was lost from the switch, but at least we have variety in weapon choice.

The inventory: What does the existence of an inventory provide? Why is
it really needed?


Whoops, sorry about DP!

No you misunderstand me Pocket I am referring to just what is generally across the board on these games. Such as weapon stats for example. Like I was saying these are secondary elements. If you look at Elder Scrolls or Bioshock(barely an RPG in some ways) there is wide variety of powers in those games. Just as KOTOR and Elder Scrolls had inventories. These are secondary elements that have become a part of RPG games in recent years. Does it make it a game more of an RPG to have those? To some it does and to some not, but regardless those are things associated with the genre atm by the general public it seems.

As for stat systems I was mainly referring to seeing weapon stats and damage protection like in the first game as well as biotic/tech protection. I am not even sure some of those resistances are even in the game anymore. I was actually saying the N7 armor was very much in the RPG realm with it's level of customization I was just saying I disliked the fact that the bonuses they provide didn't really change anything.

As for the inventory it can provide the simple need to feel like you keep gaining something as you go through the game. Material progression. It can add a sense of immersion if done right. Unfortunately ME1 was far from this. I am interested to see how BW approaches this in ME3. Finding upgrades or say the OSD on a merc for example and hacking it can lead to a hidden weapons cache side mission. I am just saying it doesn't always have to be gear driven. Getting better gear is part of what inventories do provide in games, but that shouldn't be the only thing. Customizing your gear "makes it your own" if it has enough depth and can add to the immersion. Like the N7 armor did with it's paint schemes and patterns.

Some people just love loot because the material progression makes them more powerful. In fact MMO's thrive on this. Many of them anyway. Grind levels and get better loot and become more powerful. It hasn't gone out of style yet. They are always making better items in their expansions. I am not saying that is the only draw for those games I am just saying it is a big part of them. EQ was that way and so is WoW. Anyhow I guess what I am saying is people on here are going to argue because RPGs of today are not the RPGs of yesterday in spite of how desparately one side clings to theirs and vice versa. Technology is different and the way the genre has progressed has people now associating certain elements with it. That's what I am saying pretty much.