Mass Effect is not an RPG

[Eclectic Dreck]

I have of course addressed the larger point of the thread time and again but I will do so one more time.

The problem here is that we have an argument of definition and the further problem is that, unlike your average argument of this type, there is no final arbiter of truth to be found. Nevertheless, I am of the opinion that an RPG can be defined simply as a game that offers either character agency, narrative agency, or both.

Character agency is, simply put, giving the player some level of control over their character. While the loosest interpretation of such a statement implies any game that gives a player even physical control over their avatar would qualify, such an interpretation is hardly useful. In an effort to provide a more useful definition, a player has agency over their character when any of the following conditions are met (this is not an exhaustive list but rather a sample of concepts found in games considered to be RPGs):
The character's skills can be chosen by the player and the choice offers a meaningful distinction in the character's abilities in a given situation.
The character's gear can be chosen by the player and the choice is between equally useful but functionally different options.
The world's interpretation of the character can be affected in a meaningful way by player choices.
The character's outlook is mutable by player action.

Narrative agency is much the same as character agency and simply implies that a player has a level of control over the course and ultimate outcome of a story. Again, this implies a greater level of control than the player simply choosing not to finish the story and a similarly non exhaustive list would be something like this:
The player is given one or more opportunities to alter the ultimate outcome of the game in a meaningful way.
The player is free to choose to tackle the narrative in an arbitrary order.

By meeting even a single criteria here a game could easily be called an RPG. The more criteria it meets, the more people would be willing to agree that the game is an RPG. You will note that the implied mechanical systems people so often point to as reasons a particular game isn't an RPG are not explicitly mentioned because such mechanical systems ultimately serve the purpose of giving a player agency over their character and nothing more.

 

[harvz]

i really hate what the term RPG has come to mean, it should be any game that tries to put you in the shoes of the character (eg, living their lives and not just seeing [more than the fighting moments, fable compared to halo])

now people wont accept it as an rpg if it doesnt have more than x amount of weapons, micro-management, novels worth of dialogue, create your own character, multiple levels of morality and such, etc.

where would we be if we were to play final fantasy 1 (one of the defining games)with this attitude? stuck on an island because the only bridge is still under construction.

 

[Xaositect]

Whats wrong with just full on embracing the Gears Clone nature ME2 went after? Well aside from lying to fans, and turning their backs on those who have supported Bioware for a long time, I guess nothing.

Basically, back in 07, when the primary marketing concern wasnt about trying to attract dumbass shooter gamers, a lot of us were sold on a hybrid game that had a nice slice of RPG. In ME2 we were lied to by the developers, as they said some bullshit about how "just because were improving the shooter mechanics doesnt mean were taking away any of the RPG side, in fact its stronger". Casey Hudson and Christina Norman, two important people involved in developing the game peddled this lie on different occasions - thats one reason why it cops a lot of flak.

Now ME1s RPG elements need A LOT of improving, but that doesnt mean that A) they were the worst ever, or that B) they were hardly RPG elements. ME2 doesnt even bother in most regards as an RPG, and for a game thats trying to continue to sell itself as an RPG to RPG fans, I think actually having some form of significant RPG side to the game beats next to no RPG elements at all.

Oh and please can people stop with the pathetic "it says role play, I play a role, so its a roleplaying" claim. Its not even a legitimate argument. The weakness of the players ability to actually influence the role of Shepard in ME2 aside, even if you continue to count it, you will have to begin classifying other games as RPGs. If thats the case, Red Dead Redemption is an RPG. I play the role of John Marston and I choose whether he is an ex outlaw who found a new life and honour, or if he has no problem continuing the ways of his past. Its even got a more effective "morality" meter than ME2 for crying out load.

Role playing games are descended from tabletop RPGs, and as such will always require a certain type of gameplay. The kind that allows for the kind of customisation and varied gameplay some people are missing from ME2. Take that away, like ME2 did near on completely, and you are left with elements that are simply cherry picked from other genres. RPGs are NOT about story and characters. They are NOT about "playing the role of a character" (since that describes nearly every game ever made). Its more complex than that, and simply saying "its still got a story and the illusion that your choices are having anything other than a negligable impact" and then concentrating the rest of the game on TPS combat doesnt make it an RPG.

At the moment ME2 isnt an RPG. Its a TPS with light RPG elements. Bioware could very well just give up on claiming its an RPG anymore, and just market it as the action based TPS that ME2 was. It would be a double edged sword however, meaning that they are liars for what they sold us on when this series started and when marketing ME2, but would also be telling the truth since its finally a more accurate summary of the game.

 

[SuperRobot64]

gameplay schmameplay, i would play mass effect if it was entirely the dialouge. this game could be a cooking simulator and still great by default.

 

[Jeralt2100]

I'd have to agree with the argument that most RPGs, especially JRPGs offer less in terms of choice than Mass Effect 1 or 2 do. I'll agree that ME2 should have IMPROVED features instead of REMOVING them, but the fact is that you still shape your own story. Your choices affect who lives and who dies, both inside your party and outside of it. Granted, you can't choose to not kill all the guards trying to stop you from getting to point B from point A, but you do have options. Games like Half Life or Gears, as mentioned above, don't offer this.

Now, could they offer more? Sure, Deus Ex does. Even a decade ago in the first title you were not only able to shape your story, but your approach to solving it. More than just 'Do I use an Assault Rifle, or Biotics'? You were given the combat option, the social option, and the stealth option alongside the 'moral' choices associated with Bioware titles. I'm hoping Human Revolution gives all that along with having the shiny wallpaper of a current generation title.

All that said, I loved ME1 when it released, and I loved ME2. I've spent more time playing those two games than any other I've ever owned, except maybe Resident Evil 4 or Oblivion.

 

[Yossarian1507]

You play the role of a hero tasked with saving every decent creature in the galaxy in this series of videogames. You do this by developing your character, doing quests, having dialogue with NPC's, etc, etc, blah, blah. You get my point.

No, I don't really get your point.

You play the role of an anti-hero, who's on his mission to kill almost every single God in the Greek pantheon in this series of videogames.

So... God of War is an RPG?

Nope, that's not it...

(at least for me) RPG is that kind of game when you have a choice to act and behave whatever you like (at all time mind you, because otherwise you could name for example Jedi Academy as an RPG because you have that one moral choice near the end), because that's the role you want to play in this game/campaign. So yes, ME2 IS and RPG in that category.

True, advanced skill tree, and a vast choice of inventory IMO helps with the RPG stuff, because if you want to play the role of cunning manipulator - you invest your points in charisma and dress like a big fish. If you want to be a brutal barbarian slashing your enemies with an axe - you invest in strength and buy an armor, but that's not necessary a must have. I made at least two campaigns for my friends NOT based on any RPG system, just my words, and it was still an RPG campaign.

---

Adding my two whiny cents though, ME2 choices doesn't mean a shit except from the very last one (HOPEFULLY!), and 'pick the blue/red option, because it'll always end the deal in your way' system is just stupid.

You know what is my example of a perfect RPG in computer games? Alpha Protocol. Yes, that game by Obsidian, crushed by the Escapist and most of the gaming community. Personally, I loved every inch of it, and consider it better than ME 2. Why? Because it fits my definition perfectly. You can shape Mike Thorton whatever you like, and change your heart halfway through without locking yourself best options because your paragon/renegade meter isn't full. Also, your choices really did mean something to the gameplay as well as to the story (and if you played it and disagree, let me just say two things - Grigori and Madison/Parker). Add to that (IMO) brilliant Deus Ex style skill system, and you have game that made me beat it 5 times, just to say how can I make things different by acting otherwise in certain situation, or even by changing your character build.

And ME2? I beat it once, and I got bored on my second try because everything was exactly the same, no matter how differently I tried to act.

 

[LiftYourSkinnyFists]

It's more or less a MOVIE with poor dialogue and bad action scenes.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

In the end, I consider it an RPG. I molded Shepard's character to fit what I desired, I chose my choices when the moments presented themselves, and I customized his/her appearance to suit my desires and roleplaying tastes.

I really don't give a fuck about the "semantics" battle, here.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Ok.
I am seriously weirded out by this site right now.

Theres often a hell of a lot of Mass Effect threads every day and I've noticed that it switches back and forth from fanboys going on about how much they love it to people criticising its shortcomings.

Theres nothing wrong with this though, its just bizarre, one minute love, the next hate.

It's not that bizarre really, it just shows that the game divides opinion a lot.

Personally I think it's the best game of this generation, but I still would have liked it to have a little more customisation and deeper RPG elements.

 

[SuperRobot64]

Who cares genre it even is, gameplay is just a means of progressing the story. As long as it works it doesn't matter how it plays. It's all about experiencing an engrossing and an affecting experience films and novels just cannot give you. don't go into games wanting
to "be the best around" or "pown the noobs".

 

[Thaliur]

Oh you must be trolling, nothing is as bad as Fable's moral choices.

Ok, how exactly are they different?

In both ME2 and Fable you have a very clear "good" or "bad" choice, clearly displayed through colors [In Mass Effect "good" is blue, and "bad" is red...just so you don't have to think]. There's not a single decision in the game you make that isn't clear-cut, and even the end decision is so one-sided [as in literally every member of your team tells you the right thing to do is the paragon option, even Miranda the Cerburus Op tells you that it was the right thing to do...s.

I have to disagree with you on this. The blue and red options are "persuade" and "intimidate" commands. They are connected to Paragon and Renegade of course, but most of the points you get from other speech commands or QTE.
I've often wondered about the results of apparent moral choices after their scoring was displayed (in a "THAT was Renegade?!" way).

By the way, I really like those QTE moral choices. It actually feels realistic.
"Crap, that guy will walk right to his own death if I don't..." *grab shoulder and push him to the floor*

 

[MiracleOfSound]

It seems people are really ripping into mass effect, particular ME 2 for not being RPG enough so why don't we just say its not an RPG?.

I'd sooner call it an action adventure game.

An amazing action adventure game.

 

[Vault101]

Whats wrong with just full on embracing the Gears Clone nature ME2 went after? Well aside from lying to fans, and turning their backs on those who have supported Bioware for a long time, I guess nothing.

Basically, back in 07, when the primary marketing concern wasnt about trying to attract dumbass shooter gamers, a lot of us were sold on a hybrid game that had a nice slice of RPG. In ME2 we were lied to by the developers, as they said some bullshit about how "just because were improving the shooter mechanics doesnt mean were taking away any of the RPG side, in fact its stronger". Casey Hudson and Christina Norman, two important people involved in developing the game peddled this lie on different occasions - thats one reason why it cops a lot of flak.

Now ME1s RPG elements need A LOT of improving, but that doesnt mean that A) they were the worst ever, or that B) they were hardly RPG elements. ME2 doesnt even bother in most regards as an RPG, and for a game thats trying to continue to sell itself as an RPG to RPG fans, I think actually having some form of significant RPG side to the game beats next to no RPG elements at all.

Oh and please can people stop with the pathetic "it says role play, I play a role, so its a roleplaying" claim. Its not even a legitimate argument. The weakness of the players ability to actually influence the role of Shepard in ME2 aside, even if you continue to count it, you will have to begin classifying other games as RPGs. If thats the case, Red Dead Redemption is an RPG. I play the role of John Marston and I choose whether he is an ex outlaw who found a new life and honour, or if he has no problem continuing the ways of his past. Its even got a more effective "morality" meter than ME2 for crying out load.

Role playing games are descended from tabletop RPGs, and as such will always require a certain type of gameplay. The kind that allows for the kind of customisation and varied gameplay some people are missing from ME2. Take that away, like ME2 did near on completely, and you are left with elements that are simply cherry picked from other genres. RPGs are NOT about story and characters. They are NOT about "playing the role of a character" (since that describes nearly every game ever made). Its more complex than that, and simply saying "its still got a story and the illusion that your choices are having anything other than a negligable impact" and then concentrating the rest of the game on TPS combat doesnt make it an RPG.

At the moment ME2 isnt an RPG. Its a TPS with light RPG elements. Bioware could very well just give up on claiming its an RPG anymore, and just market it as the action based TPS that ME2 was. It would be a double edged sword however, meaning that they are liars for what they sold us on when this series started and when marketing ME2, but would also be telling the truth since its finally a more accurate summary of the game.

Though I don't actually see what was so great about the RPG elements (micro managing and all that stuff) in ME1 they added nothing to the game for me and Thats the reason I like ME2 so much, everyhting feels more streamlined

anyway I don't care what people define ME2 as I just got sick of people critizing it for not having RPG elements that felt unessicary anyway look Im sorry but how can anyone enjoy micro managing equipment to shooting?

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

I disagree, you have to bear in mind that in the first game weapons could be upgraded, and their power increased. In no way within this new system has the player gained any freedom, its only been taking away. In the next paragraph you mention "difference" in weapon styles, that in itself is a reason ME1 is far superior in this sense. The fact the player can upgrade weapons, can sell them, and so on makes the weapon seem that little bit more personal. Furthermore, I think you're incorrect in stating that in ME2 every weapon is "different", the problem, in fact is that you just gain a generic assault rifle, that can then be upgraded to do more damage. Whilst in Mass Effect you were given a range of weapons and could choose which weapon you wished to use, what make, which area it was suited to [due to the wide variety of combat situations in the first game compared to the second] and so on, the same being true of armor, though armor itself has never been something of intrigue in the Mass Effect games.

You are mistaken on all fronts, really. Any assault rifle in ME1 operates in exactly the same way. The inherent variables in play that change from rifle to rifle are: damage per shot, shots before overheating, and accuracy. Incidentally, these are the same statistics used for every weapon in the game. At any given level of weapon, there is some variation between these figures with one brand having higher accuracy at the expense of damage or another having firepower over all else. If you take a step back from this at the very granular level however, you quickly realize that these numbers simply rise as the player progresses through the game. Accessories on the other hand offer the only attempt to really personalize any particular weapon as there are parts that increase damage in general, parts increase damage against specific targets, parts that increase accuracy and parts that allow players to fire more shots before the weapon overheats. That may seem like you're making a choice, but you really aren't. All the player is doing is being asked to perform additional management to ensure their weapon does the level of damage it ought to do at any given character level.

As an example, consider the sniper rifle. In general, a weapon in this category has very high damage per shot, very good accuracy and a limited number of shots before overheating. The skill governing the use of a Sniper Rifle eventually unlocks an ability that dramatically increases the damage of a single shot. Given that only in rare circumstances (and really only at the very end of the game where the top tier parts make a notable difference and there are two accessory slots) can a player actually increase the total number of shots that they can fire with a sniper rifle and the skill governing it's use, it thus makes sense that a player ought to maximize the single shot damage potential. Thus the smart player will simply put the parts in that maximize the damage of the weapon at the expense of everything else simply so that their rifle is capable of instantly killing a target. By contrast, the choice of ammunition is generally a tactical choice of the same type as choosing what weapon to use in a given scenarior. By burying this particular choice behind a half dozen menus, the player is loathe to do the smart thing of swapping ammunition types as the situation calls for it and simply suffers through having non optimal damage in certain situations.

In ME2, rather than having hundreds of sniper rifles the player is given three to choose from. The first is a high damage single shot affair, the second does somewhat less damage but fires many shots and the last is a high damage single shot affair. While the end game weapon is functionally the equivalent of the starting weapon, the average player will likely opt to use the end game item over the starting weapon as the game's infiltrator class tends to place greater value on the damage of a single shot rather than the higher average damage over time the middle rifle offers. The only thing a player loses here is the granularity of the choice as the functional choice available to the player (more damage in a single shot or more shots before having to pause for a moment) is still available to the player. Additionally, because ammunition is suddenly a player power they are free to turn on such things when the situation calls for it thus giving them ready access to this tactical decision rather than burying it behind a dozen menus.

This is repeated for each and every category of weapon and item. I'm not saying the player isn't losing something in ME2; indeed, I explicitly say that they are. What I am getting at however as the inherent choices a player is making, that is the actual choices that result in a functional difference in the game experience remain. You loose granularity, yes, but that granularity only rarely offered a functional difference.

I'm not going to repeat the same points for each of your comments, but needless to say, the fact Mass Effect gave you choice [and the conversation skill was defiantly not an illusion of choice...] in how you set up your character is something that should have been expanded upon in Mass Effect 2, instead you get a system that, if anything, takes control away from the player.

And I think that you probably ought to examine in greater detail just what those choices you were presumably making really meant. I think that you, like most people making this exact complaint, are blinded by the illusion of choice so much that you are not identifying where the actual choices are.

Mass Effect is not the only game that features such a conundrum. The Escapist's Shamus Young recently pointed out this problem is inherent in the ultra popular game World of Warcraft.

The bottom line point that I am attempting to make an enormous length is this: giving a player a choice means nothing if that choice is not meaningful. What ME2 did was remove intermediary meaningless choices in favor or larger meaningful ones. What the player lost was a bunch of busy work and the important choices generally remained.

 

[silasbufu]

For the love o- Dude, just fix your grammar and spelling.

What is it that your profile name says? I just can't comprehend. Ironic

 

[Gitty101]

Take a long time to think about the term RPG.Role playing Game.ME2 is a game and you play a role.A role you can choose.
Nowhere in this term does it say you need an inventory,stats,and a skill tree.
Don't get me wrong,I prefered the ME1 style of RPG than ME2,and I love RPGs in the traditional sense,but labeling ME2 NOT an RPG because it doesn't take the same approach as other games is stupid,especially since it stays true to the very name of RPG.

This person here speaks the truth. Bow to the wisdom they provide!

 

[Danistuta]

I suppose you could say that Mass Effect 2 is the modern culmination of RPG, action and adventure genres. Of course it's not a 'proper' RPG - as posters have mentioned, it's a little stripped down in that regard. But what it is, for me anyway, is a well executed blockbuster that covers a lot of ground. It's not often that big-budget games really do it for me (Halo, Gears, Final Philanthropy, Dragon Age) - they seem to have too much of the 'everyman syndrome' which, as a hardcore gamer, is sleep inducing. Mass Effect 2 was engrossing and highly playable. Regardless of which genre it belongs to, I'd be happy to play a few more games with this level of polish and accomplishment in the future.

 

[Jake the Snake]

*shrugs* I think people are just too snobbish when it comes to what defines a "role playing" game. I think ME2 was a superb RPG, cinematic, emotional, and epic. And if you don't think that, well then, that's sad for you. I'm going to go enjoy my games instead of complaining how they don't fit in a specific definition of what I think an RPG should be.

 

[Xaositect]

(SPOILERS!!!!!!! Detailed look at the layout of ME2 and all its shooter oriented missions!!!!!)


A summary of the plot of Mass Effect 2:

First level - Cerberus facility. Mostly shooting mechs. A few minor conversations with Jacob, Miranda and plothole man.

Second level - Freedoms progress. Mostly shooting mechs. A few minor conversations with Tali, and Veetor.

Branching section - Choose which shooting level to recruit characters.

Omega:

Garrus - Starts with several conversation and sabotage options. Rest of the level involves killing waves of enemies. Minor Garrus conversations intersped though killing hundreds of enemies.

Mordin - Killing assorted mercs, Krogan, and mostly vorcha. Minor conversations intersped.

(around 10-15 minutes could be spend doing Omegas piss weak side missions. 10-15 allows for time wasting. If you follow the objectivs, youd be hard pressed to get past 10 minutes - So far thats several hours of shooting, maybe a half hour of conversations and 10 or more minutes doing side missions that dont involve shooting).

Okay, other recruitment missions:

Jack - Starts with conversation, and then spend the rest of the level killing the prison guards until meeting Jack.

Grunt - Mostly spent killing Mercs/Krogan. Minor conversations intersped, mainly Okeers being by far the longest.

At this point, youll be directed to Horizon. Most of this level involves gunning down collectors. Minor conversations with a colonist and Virmire survivor from ME1 take place.

Then we hit the other branching section of more shooter mission recruitments.

Illium

Samara - Begins with questioning locals. Minor shootout before meeting and conversing with Samara. Sent to eclipse warehouse. Spend the rest of the level gunning down mercs bar two minor conversations. Mission ends with conversation with Samara.

Thane - Gun down same eclipse mercs through most of the building. Minor conversations with workers who are hiding. Ends with conversation with Nassana and Thane

(Again, a small amount of time can be spent doing side missions here. Probably about 15-20 minutes max)


Tali - Kill hundreds of Geth, with a few brief conversations with Kalreeger and Tali intersped.

At some point during the recruitment stage you will be called up to visit the collector ship. Pretty much the same deal as Horizon - gun down hundreds of collector minions, with a few short conversations breaking up the action.

Youll also be sent to recruit Legion. Mission just involves husk spam for the most part. It takes place aboard a dead Reaper, one of the games main antagonists, and you learn FUCKING NOTHING about them, other than being spammed by husks is boring, which you learn at earlier stages of the game anyway.

After that its the collector base. Pretty most of it involves more collector spam that you have to gun down. The decisions are made during the mission which, based on your choice and their loyalty, will determine who survives. Mission plays out the same every single time regardless. All it alters is who gets blacked out on the selection screen at the end, or in the worst case, if your game ends with Shepard dead. If it does, you get a slightly altered end game scene with joker instead of Shepard.

Last boss involves the exact same thing the rest of the game does: hiding behind cover, to pop out and shoot at it. Youre limited to eyes and chest, but its the same premise.

Thats not even counting the loyalty missions, about 90% of which follow the same formula, and again, N7 missions which are the same.

Most of the game is spent shooting from behind cover, with the main breaks in the game being short, occasional cutscenes.

Thats a TPS with mildly interactive cutscenes.

Even if you choose one of the power oriented classes, you still have to duck behind cover and pop out to fire them at enemies, provided youve stripped their defenses, the most common way of which is by using firearms.

Also the game forces a new weapon into the power based classes hands at the middle stage of the game, acknowledging how shitty its RPG elements are, and clearly suggesting youd better get more invovled with what the game is about: shooting.

TL;DR - 90% of ME2 is a TPS. Therefore it should be classed as one, instead of people insisting its an RPG.

 

[gardyna]

(before i start writing i want to mention that i´ve only played the demo and not the actual game (since i only have a ps3(i do intend on buying the game shortly after it comes out tho)))

i thought RPG meant Role Playing Game and although there isn´´t as much custimization in the second game it does alow you to tailor the experience to your style of gameplay (sniper, tank, scout, soilder (in TF2 terms)) and you also do more roleplaying in Mass effect(from mwhat i could see) than in most RPG´s this year. and that´s thanks to the dialouge tree and interuptions so you character should be behaving almost exactly like you want to and if that´s not roleplaying i must need to re-evaluate my concepr of roleplaying

Side note: it might not be as deep as the first game be more shooter oriented but people have told me it´s still a great game