No "Meaningless Stat Games" in Mass Effect 3

[Fanboy]

But thats our point - it's not a roleplaying game if it's purely based on the players personal skill.

In the old Hitman games I could choose multiple routes, I could choose who to leave alive or who dies but everything I did I did using my skill as a player - never the skills of the character.

In the thief games it's the same - I had a lot of choices, I had a lot of player agency but every skill was based on my skill as a player NOT as a character.

In Deus Ex, in ME, in Alpha protocol the chances of success were affected by the player actions but the main success comes from the characters skill. As the characters skill increases the target reticule becomes more accurate and more stable allowing the player to better guide the character but it's the character that matters.

Without Stats the character is never seperate to the player it's just the player in a different set of clothes possibly speaking with a different accent.

To me a role playing game is about the strategy of preparing the character to survive the danger, not on the twitch ability of myself being capable of handling the danger directly.

[This may not be relevant to ME3 since they never said they were removing stats, just unnoticable changes to stats, but I just wanted to point out that your definition of role playing is not the only viable definition]

Didn't it seem silly to you that Commander Shepard, an experienced soldier and potential Spectre, can barely shoot her weapon straight? Even if that makes sense to you (and I'll admit I can look past it too) why after mastering her weapon of choice in Mass Effect would she then be reduced to a cock-eyed spaz again in Mass Effect 2? Brain trauma? Hmmm, that would explain some of the dialogue. Anyways, This isn't one of those fables where you start as a peasant and become the hero. You are already the hero at the beginning of the game. Imagine if Garrett, the master thief, had to level up his lock-picking... Nonsense!

I have no problem when the weapon skill progression fits in with the story, like it did in Deus Ex, System Shock 2, and Fallout 3, even though it can be a tad frustrating. I just think there are other, better ways to show character progression without handicapping the player and contradicting the stories' established characters.

 

[Arec Balrin]

ALL games have 'meaningless stat games' under-pinning them. It's just that traditional RPGs are transparent about what those stats are and don't assume the player is a moron that can't do school-level math.

This news is not welcome no matter who its intended audience was.

 

[RYjet911]

This just means that when we spend points, we know what's changing. No pointless math equations giving the false impression of depth. Besides, if RPG purism is getting in the way of a better Mass Effect, then RPG purists can screw off.

I'm so glad that my love of leveling, looting, and tactics is now relegated to "meaningless stat games".

When did they say they were removing leveling, tactics, or looting?

Looting was gone in ME2, as was in depth leveling and combat was much less tactical and more fast paced. Seems to be what he is referencing.

I'd hardly call ME1 indepth levelling. It just meant every level up (Which didn't happen particularly often) I'd get a 1-2% boost in whatever I decided to upgrade, which would immediately be squashed to standard thanks to level scaling. And ME2 had a much better system for ordering team mates around, my experience of ME1 being let Wrex run at the enemy and soak up the damage while you and your other team mate shot until everything died.

 

[REPLAY13]

possibly explained by the fact that Shepard may retain all his skills from ME2? I mean, if he's still a laser-guided killing machine then why would he still need to level up?

 

[PhoenixVanguard]

To me a role playing game is about the strategy of preparing the character to survive the danger, not on the twitch ability of myself being capable of handling the danger directly.

[This may not be relevant to ME3 since they never said they were removing stats, just unnoticable changes to stats, but I just wanted to point out that your definition of role playing is not the only viable definition]

Didn't it seem silly to you that Commander Shepard, an experienced soldier and potential Spectre, can barely shoot her weapon straight? Even if that makes sense to you (and I'll admit I can look past it too) why after mastering her weapon of choice in Mass Effect would she then be reduced to a cock-eyed spaz again in Mass Effect 2? Brain trauma? Hmmm, that would explain some of the dialogue. Anyways, This isn't one of those fables where you start as a peasant and become the hero. You are already the hero at the beginning of the game. Imagine if Garrett, the master thief, had to level up his lock-picking... Nonsense!

I have no problem when the weapon skill progression fits in with the story, like it did in Deus Ex, System Shock 2, and Fallout 3, even though it can be a tad frustrating. I just think there are other, better ways to show character progression without handicapping the player and contradicting the stories' established characters.

Mostly exactly what he said, but I would also like to argue that the difference between a roleplaying game and any other game where you play a character is that yes, I am as much in that role as possible. The constraints lie in the fact that ultimately, the story has to go a certain way. Mass Effect is actually a great example of this. Can Shepard ever really be EVIL in Mass Effect? Not really. I can think of only one decision option between both games that I consider to be inexcusably evil (End of Samara's loyalty mission), having no "greater good" argument at all.

But I'm free to choose within Shepard's role of being a galaxy saving hero whether I want to be a paragon or renegade. That to me means infinitely more to roleplaying than forced impotency. If I mess up, which I do in Mass Effect, then that's what my character would do. If I perform rock solid, that's MY character, not the game deciding what my character is. If I want my game to play itself, then I'll read a book or watch a movie. Or play a JRPG.

 

[Continuity]

Nothing RPG was stripped in ME2
RPGs have nothing to do with stats and inventories. RPGs are about Role-Playing, that's why it is in the name.

That said I'm looking forward to the return of some of the inventory.

Dont be silly, seriously. So every game beyond tetris is an RPG cause you play a role, la la la la. No sorry, RPG is a genre with expected traits and norms so when they take out some of those ideas it is becoming less of a RPG.

Obviously not every game where you play a role is an RPG but those old RPG elements, the behind-the-scenes dice rolls, the overstocked inventories, etc... Those elements were adopted to deal with a lack of capabilities in computers at the time. They were easy and mathematical, brilliant and fine in their own rights but hardly what should define the genre

Any game in which you play an unprescribed role with the ability to make meaningful choices, gameplay or storywise, is an RPG. Those other elements have nothing to do with it.

And thats where you're wrong, RPG is precisely these elements, take those away and what you're left with is some sort of action adventure.
And no, dice-rolls ect were not implemented into computer games because of "a lack of capabilities in computers at the time", it was because it was what the developers knew, they drew inspiration from the table top and P&P RPG games, many of the first CRPGs were literal translations of table top.
THe developers knew tabletop, the fans knew it, it made sense and it suited everyone... until new gamers came into the genre and were bamboozled by all the stats and numbers and calculations etc.. at that point it became an accessibility issue and since then we have seen the decline of the CRPG.

 

[The Random One]

Yeah, whatever. If those stats don't affect how you chat up blue girls and snarl at Krogan I don't care.

 

[camazotz]

I'm guessing that the reason I still see Mass Effect as an RPG is because I'm old enough to remember when RPG meant "role playing game," which meant telling stories about characters....and system wasn't tied to leveling and stat management, like the term seems to mean for video game RPGs these days. I mean, to me Red Dead Redemption, Enslaved and even Gears of War are all RPGs because you assume a role in a story...and the ones that are Good RPGs are the ones where you can influence the story in meaningful ways (ala Mass Effect, RDR and such).

How on earth the idea of RPGs got terminally wedded to leveling mechanics and stat manipulation....ah, I guess I'll just blame D&D and leave it at that.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Nothing RPG was stripped in ME2
RPGs have nothing to do with stats and inventories. RPGs are about Role-Playing, that's why it is in the name.

That said I'm looking forward to the return of some of the inventory.

Dont be silly, seriously. So every game beyond tetris is an RPG cause you play a role, la la la la. No sorry, RPG is a genre with expected traits and norms so when they take out some of those ideas it is becoming less of a RPG.

Obviously not every game where you play a role is an RPG but those old RPG elements, the behind-the-scenes dice rolls, the overstocked inventories, etc... Those elements were adopted to deal with a lack of capabilities in computers at the time. They were easy and mathematical, brilliant and fine in their own rights but hardly what should define the genre

Any game in which you play an unprescribed role with the ability to make meaningful choices, gameplay or storywise, is an RPG. Those other elements have nothing to do with it.

And thats where you're wrong, RPG is precisely these elements, take those away and what you're left with is some sort of action adventure.
And no, dice-rolls ect were not implemented into computer games because of "a lack of capabilities in computers at the time", it was because it was what the developers knew, they drew inspiration from the table top and P&P RPG games, many of the first CRPGs were literal translations of table top.
THe developers knew tabletop, the fans knew it, it made sense and it suited everyone... until new gamers came into the genre and were bamboozled by all the stats and numbers and calculations etc.. at that point it became an accessibility issue and since then we have seen the decline of the CRPG.

So why is the dice roll stuff central to what makes an RPG an RPG? Let's say I want to model shooting someone - I can either model it by rolling Attack Bonus + 1d20, or model it as a shooter. Tabletop games are better at the former, but the latter is generally a more immersive and engaging way to do it.

 

[High in Fiber]

possibly explained by the fact that Shepard may retain all his skills from ME2? I mean, if he's still a laser-guided killing machine then why would he still need to level up?

If you port from ME2, your starter level is where you last left off. Their would be some changes though to the skill set if I remember. I am hoping for Charm and Intimidate, as ME1 had all your skills deal with combat, and was useful, compare to ME2 where Charm and Intimidate doesn't do anything to combat, and force me to go the EXTREME!!!!, side of Paragon or renegade. Also as mention boost to defense and having specialization mean something with the boost.

I've been trying my best not to read too much about Mass Effect 3, but I'm kind of losing that battle. That said, I hadn't heard about being able to keep your ME2 levels going into 3. That could be pretty neat.

ME1 went up to level 60 at the max (after a few playthroughs). ME2 only went up to level 30. I'm speculating on this, but if ME3 would continue up to 60 (and if imported characters can start at level 30), then it seems almost like ME3 would be like playing epic levels in D&D 3rd edition. Starting halfway to your full potential would somehow feel more right than building up from zero again. This is just my mind wandering, though.


On the topic of skills being useful for something outside of combat, I don't see it as that much of a bad thing. It could enrich the roleplaying experience depending on how its done. For example, if you're parleying with a group of well-armed thugs you could A) use your high paragon status to sweet talk them, B) use your high renegade status to intimidate them, or C) use a high investment in biotics skills to engage in aggressive negotiations.

I think it would be kind of fun to be given an option C.

 

[katsabas]

The impact should be at the story and RPG elements, not the combat. The combat was fine, except that I had to bring up the power wheel every few secs.


Hope EA doesn't screw this up. This is only happening cause they stuck their noses in the project.

I still remain in the caution area. After E3, I will advance to either Alert or Cooldown.

 

[Zydrate]

Damnit.
Damnit damnit damnit.

 

[Lupus_Infernus]

I'm sure the story will be great because Bioware seems to have a very active writing team. That doesn't mean the RPG elements will be be prominent though. But it's kind of true what they say. In ME1, a number of the mods to your weapons really don't appear to have much effect aside from the ammo mods.

 

[Iname]

I read this thread and can't understand one thing - why people can't grasp point of stats and numbers in RPG's? "Hey, *I* just pointed crosshair on this guys head, but *MY CHARACTER* still missed, that's stupid!". Players don't tend to become their characters, instead, their characters must be nothing but a suit, that allows them to walk into another world. They don't understand that while you may be experienced FPS-gamer, who can easily put headshots whith their eyes closed, their character, according to his/her character sheet, is not very good with guns, that's why, despite all your efforts, he/she sucks at ranged combat. Numbers are crucial for RPG's, but not for munchkinism - its purpose is to describe your character abilities, his strong and weak sides, what he (not you, he) can/can't do. Why RPG fans constantly blame FPS games? Because in most FPS main character is just empty shell, so players tend to fill that emptyness with their own personality (or just treat him as a mindless robot, that shoots things on their command) and that soonly becomes a bad habit. So in every game it's not Kasavel The Wizard, or Space Captain Maverick, it's Bob, John, etc. who saved galaxy about fifteen times and now starts fast run number sixteen for some fun dialogues and, maybe, tits, because tomorrow he must slay robo-Hitler. Again.
Now for RPG elements in ME. Yes, RPG's are about choises, otherwise it's just hack'n'slash. "What will my character do?" - this question must pop-up in your brain as frequent, as possible. But in ME you get "Shoot hundred of dudes, that answer a yes/no/maybe question". In RPG you should have a few options for every problem - stealthy character will just sneak past hundreds of dudes, cunning character will trick them, etc. Hell, you even can make so, that there won't be any armed dudes, or it will be unnecessary to even go in there. But nope, to the shooting range, good sir, grind for some dialogue lines. That's the reason, I never finished second playthrough of ME2, because despite you efforts, youll never open alternative solution, hidden story arc, or change course of story. All you'll get - few additional dialogue lines and then back to shooting.

 

[teknoarcanist]

RPG's are great.

Shooters are great.

I like RPGs.
I do not particularly like Shooters.
Were it up to me, ME3 would be much more toward the RPG side than the Shooter side. It seems they're going for the opposite. Thus I am upset.

That's why Bioware geared Dragon Age more toward the RPG side.

 

[Vibhor]

-snip-

Iron sights.
Boom. Your argument has been made invalid.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

I'm definably buying Deus Ex now, as should everyone else who cringes at this recent press release.

I've have just realized this but we have a game coming in August that HAS inventories, upgrades and old school RPG elements. Mass Effect was a great series, but if the final game is just Gear's of War IN SPACE well... I'll just continue playing as Adam Jenson instead of Commander Shepard.

ReCapcha :eadics owner

 

[Duskflamer]

I'm curious where people get the idea that RPGs are entirely about story.

If you're defining it as "Role Playing Game: A game where you play a role," then EVERY game is an RPG. In Halo you play the role of Master Chief. in Super Mario Brothers you play the role of Mario.

The term RPG as applied to video games refers to a style of play, pioneered by Dungeons and Dragons and popularized in the video game medium by Final Fantasy.

Go ahead and look at the original Final Fantasy, the story is incredibly hard to follow, the player characters are empty shells, and despite the open world, progress requires going from point A to point B to kill bad guy C, all while leveling up and gaining stats, items, gear, and spells.

This is the game that spawned the video game concept of RPG, should it have taken a different name? Perhaps, but that's the name that got stuck to the genre and it is far to late to try to change it now. Like it or not, RPG does not refer to dialog choices and characterizations, it refers to a style of gameplay centered around stat and equipment management. If you don't like that kind of game that's fine, but if a game doesn't include those aspects don't try to claim it's an RPG just because it has a story.