No "Meaningless Stat Games" in Mass Effect 3

[Ghengis John]

Calling Mass Effect an RPG is a pretty serious genre stretch at this point, but that doesn't mean it won't be a hell of a good game when it comes out.

You think RPG's are about stats. That's a little sad really.

 

[Njdevil1288]

snip

On the other hand, big budget shooters are veering into RPG territory at least as much. Bioshock, Borderlands, etc. - even games like Black Ops or BFBC2 have classes and customization now. Genre isn't as important as good gameplay, IMO.

I was typing up a long, detailed responce to this when my computer decided to blue screen out of nowhere >.< so I'll give you the short version.

In games, genre = gameplay.

Borderlands is the perfect example of an FPS/RPG

Bioshock is iffy, but I'll admit it has significant RPG elements.

Haven't played the last two, but from what I hear about Black Ops, it does have rank ups and skills as a result of that, and I applaud their inclusion, but nobody is calling it an FPS/RPG, they just call it an FPS, because at the end of the day, the RPG elements are haphazardly tacked on while the overwhelming focus is on the FPS elements of the game.

ME1 was squarely an FPS/RPG, not executed nearly as smoothly as Borderlands but still definitely an RPG at heart.

ME2 is closer to Bioshock level, it's certainly more solidly an RPG than Bioshock is, but it's close.

The fear is that ME3 will end up being closer to Black Ops and similar games, a shooter with RPG elements tacked onto it, and EA's recent announcements are only fueling that fear.

at least your honest to admit that you havent played the last two COD but to clarify taking your statement as u said it u would know that ranking up and unlocking things swapping perks and adding mods to your guns has been around since COD4 and Black Ops only added even more customization, to further clarify COD4 was 3 COD games ago. Also the slight RPG tweeking is exclusive to the multiplayer the single player is a straight FPS thats why no1 is calling it an RPG/FPS hybrid, Dues EX, to an extent bioshock and of course borderlands fits the bill. SO no ME3 will never end up like black ops or gears of war cause those are straight shooters. Like i said the slight rpg things are exclusive to the multiplayer and they have been a staple of the game for the last few games.

 

[Duskflamer]

snip

On the other hand, big budget shooters are veering into RPG territory at least as much. Bioshock, Borderlands, etc. - even games like Black Ops or BFBC2 have classes and customization now. Genre isn't as important as good gameplay, IMO.

snip

Well, the real question is how you define an RPG. Because to me, a story-driven game with extensive dialogue, a large cast of characters who fight alongside you, a customizable PC, an emphasis on choice, character classes, and skill trees is solidly in RPG territory.

While all of those are tropes generally associated with RPGs, none of them are needed for an RPG and many of them are not unique to it. You can easily have a non-RPG that is story driven with plenty of dialog, many characters, PC customization, and choice. Character classes and Skill trees generally only show up in RPGs but I need only point to Oblivion as one that is clearly an RPG without either of those.

In my mind, the core of an RPG is a gradual and constant increase in the power of your character. I don't care if that's due to level ups, other form of stat increases, gaining magic spells, whatever. As long as the character him/herself is getting more powerful as the game goes on, it counts in my mind. I do NOT count equipment into this however, or else every FPS on the market would also count, as you get new and (generally) better guns through the game, but any other form of gradual power increase places the game as an RPG in my mind.

There are, however, certain keystone elements that define a "traditional" (read: Final Fantasy style) RPG. HP to represent how much damage you can take, MP to determine how often you can use special skills, a system to buy/sell and organize equipment for your characters, and level ups are all part of what defines a traditional RPG, but you can easily have an RPG that doesn't include all of these (I'd say any except that IMO, HP is the most acceptable way to keep track of damage, it doesn't cripple you for getting shot like you would be in real life and it shows a defined number for how much punishment you can take.)

And for me, the whole genre vs. gameplay thing boils down to this: a choice made by game developers to put a game into a genre does not necessarily also work to make the game a good game. Take the chance to hit mechanic in Morrowind - it's an RPG trope, but it detracts from good gameplay. Morrowind is still 100% RPG with or without that mechanic.

As I said before, you don't need to include every trope of the game to get the essence of the genre, when I said that gameplay = genre, I meant that video game genres are defined by how you play through the game. A game where you jump around to get from point A to point B is a platformer, a game where you go around and shoot people with guns is an FPS, etc. Do note that gameplay is not entirely combat, otherwise games like The Sims would have no gameplay and a majority of RPG/ would just be the something.

Or take Mass Effect - in the first game, you buy and sell weapons. This makes basically no sense - if Shepard works for the Council, they'd find a way to keep her supplied. From a design perspective, it's in the game because people generally do that in RPGs, not because it makes sense in terms of the story. (Of course, the "scanning for resources" replacement makes even less sense, but that fits more into the "bad idea" category than the "RPG" or "shooter" categories.)

See above, though I'd say that they shouldn't have entirely ripped out the inventory system for ME2, they could have made it a lot better and the hope (or at least, I hope) is that some improved form of the inventory system will return for ME3, some form that makes more sense for the game of course.

So the point is that devs should just focus on making their RPG a good game, rather than trying to cram as many RPG tropes as possible into it. At the end of the day, a Mass Effect game will be an RPG regardless of whether Commander Shepard had her gun built on the Normandy, filled out a requisition form for it, or bought it in a store somewhere.

I have no doubt that ME3 will qualify as an RPG, I (and others) simply hope that it will solidly qualify as such, not barely qualify as such.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, it's not that we want meaningless stats in our RPGs, it's just that we don't trust EA to differentiate a meaningless stat from something they just don't understand.

snip

snip

at least your honest to admit that you havent played the last two COD but to clarify taking your statement as u said it u would know that ranking up and unlocking things swapping perks and adding mods to your guns has been around since COD4 and Black Ops only added even more customization, to further clarify COD4 was 3 COD games ago. Also the slight RPG tweeking is exclusive to the multiplayer the single player is a straight FPS thats why no1 is calling it an RPG/FPS hybrid, Dues EX, to an extent bioshock and of course borderlands fits the bill. SO no ME3 will never end up like black ops or gears of war cause those are straight shooters. Like i said the slight rpg things are exclusive to the multiplayer and they have been a staple of the game for the last few games.

Thank you for the information. I actually didn't even realize that those games had gun mods (I don't play FPS games in general, as I suck at them and don't enjoy the multiplayer experience. I die constantly even just playing either of the Mass Effect games on low difficulty.), I could argue semantics over this but that's not at the heart at things here, and as I said I do commend the developers for adding more depth, I'll refrain from commenting more on the topic simply due to lack of first-hand experience.

 

[Njdevil1288]

snip

On the other hand, big budget shooters are veering into RPG territory at least as much. Bioshock, Borderlands, etc. - even games like Black Ops or BFBC2 have classes and customization now. Genre isn't as important as good gameplay, IMO.

snip

Well, the real question is how you define an RPG. Because to me, a story-driven game with extensive dialogue, a large cast of characters who fight alongside you, a customizable PC, an emphasis on choice, character classes, and skill trees is solidly in RPG territory.

While all of those are tropes generally associated with RPGs, none of them are needed for an RPG and many of them are not unique to it. You can easily have a non-RPG that is story driven with plenty of dialog, many characters, PC customization, and choice. Character classes and Skill trees generally only show up in RPGs but I need only point to Oblivion as one that is clearly an RPG without either of those.

In my mind, the core of an RPG is a gradual and constant increase in the power of your character. I don't care if that's due to level ups, other form of stat increases, gaining magic spells, whatever. As long as the character him/herself is getting more powerful as the game goes on, it counts in my mind. I do NOT count equipment into this however, or else every FPS on the market would also count, as you get new and (generally) better guns through the game, but any other form of gradual power increase places the game as an RPG in my mind.

There are, however, certain keystone elements that define a "traditional" (read: Final Fantasy style) RPG. HP to represent how much damage you can take, MP to determine how often you can use special skills, a system to buy/sell and organize equipment for your characters, and level ups are all part of what defines a traditional RPG, but you can easily have an RPG that doesn't include all of these (I'd say any except that IMO, HP is the most acceptable way to keep track of damage, it doesn't cripple you for getting shot like you would be in real life and it shows a defined number for how much punishment you can take.)

And for me, the whole genre vs. gameplay thing boils down to this: a choice made by game developers to put a game into a genre does not necessarily also work to make the game a good game. Take the chance to hit mechanic in Morrowind - it's an RPG trope, but it detracts from good gameplay. Morrowind is still 100% RPG with or without that mechanic.

As I said before, you don't need to include every trope of the game to get the essence of the genre, when I said that gameplay = genre, I meant that video game genres are defined by how you play through the game. A game where you jump around to get from point A to point B is a platformer, a game where you go around and shoot people with guns is an FPS, etc. Do note that gameplay is not entirely combat, otherwise games like The Sims would have no gameplay and a majority of RPG/ would just be the something.

Or take Mass Effect - in the first game, you buy and sell weapons. This makes basically no sense - if Shepard works for the Council, they'd find a way to keep her supplied. From a design perspective, it's in the game because people generally do that in RPGs, not because it makes sense in terms of the story. (Of course, the "scanning for resources" replacement makes even less sense, but that fits more into the "bad idea" category than the "RPG" or "shooter" categories.)

See above, though I'd say that they shouldn't have entirely ripped out the inventory system for ME2, they could have made it a lot better and the hope (or at least, I hope) is that some improved form of the inventory system will return for ME3, some form that makes more sense for the game of course.

So the point is that devs should just focus on making their RPG a good game, rather than trying to cram as many RPG tropes as possible into it. At the end of the day, a Mass Effect game will be an RPG regardless of whether Commander Shepard had her gun built on the Normandy, filled out a requisition form for it, or bought it in a store somewhere.

I have no doubt that ME3 will qualify as an RPG, I (and others) simply hope that it will solidly qualify as such, not barely qualify as such.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, it's not that we want meaningless stats in our RPGs, it's just that we don't trust EA to differentiate a meaningless stat from something they just don't understand.

snip

snip

at least your honest to admit that you havent played the last two COD but to clarify taking your statement as u said it u would know that ranking up and unlocking things swapping perks and adding mods to your guns has been around since COD4 and Black Ops only added even more customization, to further clarify COD4 was 3 COD games ago. Also the slight RPG tweeking is exclusive to the multiplayer the single player is a straight FPS thats why no1 is calling it an RPG/FPS hybrid, Dues EX, to an extent bioshock and of course borderlands fits the bill. SO no ME3 will never end up like black ops or gears of war cause those are straight shooters. Like i said the slight rpg things are exclusive to the multiplayer and they have been a staple of the game for the last few games.

Thank you for the information. I actually didn't even realize that those games had gun mods (I don't play FPS games in general, as I suck at them and don't enjoy the multiplayer experience. I die constantly even just playing either of the Mass Effect games on low difficulty.), I could argue semantics over this but that's not at the heart at things here, and as I said I do commend the developers for adding more depth, I'll refrain from commenting more on the topic simply due to lack of first-hand experience.

noted it just gets to me a little when people bash FPS games COD in general and know nothing about it (not that u bashed it but i wanted to clarify certian things). I have this feeling that alot of people who bash these kinda of games and are getting all pissy about the improved shooting in ME3 are people who just arent good at shooters, (also not a slight to you cause its clear that despite the lack of shooter skill it seems like u very much enjoy the ME games)

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

I've written before that traditional RPG mechanics wind up being very clunky, at best, in action RPGs. What works behind a DM's screen or between turns in a Turn-Based RPG doesn't work so well when you're the one in control. A DM can make a low damage score from a gun make sense. "The bullet grazes the orc and does 3 damage. The arrow bounces off his armor, inconveniencing him slightly." Doesn't work so well when you're the one firing the gun. When you see a normal human take a direct hit from bullet to the face as if lightly slapped (often with the same animation), shrugs it off, and keeps shooting, it ruins the experience. More so if it happens ten times.

I'm not saying RPG elements need to be scrapped for action games - but I think Bioware's on the right track with reinventing them. What worked for turn based RPGs should have stayed with turn based RPGs. Instead of making a square peg fit into a round hole, they should make a round peg.

 

[Jeronus]

I got ME1 because I heard it was a great rpg. After playing ME2 and reading this article, I wonder why they didn't make the entire series a purely shooter based affair.

 

[Duskflamer]

snip

megasnip

noted it just gets to me a little when people bash FPS games COD in general and know nothing about it (not that u bashed it but i wanted to clarify certian things). I have this feeling that alot of people who bash these kinda of games and are getting all pissy about the improved shooting in ME3 are people who just arent good at shooters, (also not a slight to you cause its clear that despite the lack of shooter skill it seems like u very much enjoy the ME games)

Noted, sorry if I came across that way. I know that I don't like FPS', and in general I don't make comments about them. The comments I did make were based on what I've heard from others (including people who do like the games), what I'd mostly heard amounted to certain perks unbalancing the game and generally what I head made it sound like the whole perk system was poorly thought out and poorly balanced. But again, all the information I got was second hand, and it's very likely that my mind put it through an "I don't like FPS'" filter.

And yes. I very much enjoy the ME games, mostly for the characters and choice system, though I do get a certain satisfactions from collection sidequests and trying out different skills.

 

[Njdevil1288]

I got ME1 because I heard it was a great rpg. After playing ME2 and reading this article, I wonder why they didn't make the entire series a purely shooter based affair.

Because it would not have worked if it was a straight shooter.

 

[Njdevil1288]

snip

megasnip

noted it just gets to me a little when people bash FPS games COD in general and know nothing about it (not that u bashed it but i wanted to clarify certian things). I have this feeling that alot of people who bash these kinda of games and are getting all pissy about the improved shooting in ME3 are people who just arent good at shooters, (also not a slight to you cause its clear that despite the lack of shooter skill it seems like u very much enjoy the ME games)

Noted, sorry if I came across that way. I know that I don't like FPS', and in general I don't make comments about them. The comments I did make were based on what I've heard from others (including people who do like the games), what I'd mostly heard amounted to certain perks unbalancing the game and generally what I head made it sound like the whole perk system was poorly thought out and poorly balanced. But again, all the information I got was second hand, and it's very likely that my mind put it through an "I don't like FPS'" filter.

And yes. I very much enjoy the ME games, mostly for the characters and choice system, though I do get a certain satisfactions from collection sidequests and trying out different skills.

alot of these unbalancing issues are indeed correct, but they are almost exclusive to modern warfare 2, infinite m203 aka noob tubes via One man army, super magic lunges through bullets via commando pro. The perks were fine in cod4 but in an attempt to make mw2 more tactical they just made it unbalanced and broken (most of these issues were fixed in black ops). MW2 as fun as it was as a black eye to FPS fans and the kind of people it attracted (alot of whom refuse to play black ops cause they cant abuse it) leaves non fps fans to generalize and think were all a bunch of idiots shouting racist and homophobic insults in the game lobbies.

 

[Cody Dishner]

well Its official IMO
Bioware is no longer exclusive to RPGs
/chokes back fanboy rage

 

[WonderWillard]

I am going to control my natural urge to get angry and nervous, and hold off until I see a gameplay video. All the information we've gotten so far is pretty vague.

 

[PhoenixVanguard]

@Duskflamer

You get to be my new favorite for using phrases like "in my mind" before stating an opinion as though it were fact, because while I disagree to an extent, I can certainly see why you might think that, and I respect it. Also...actually reading counterarguments, admitting to faults in your own argument, and keeping an open mind? Seriously, if half of the nerd raging on this forum were civilized discourse like that, we might actually be able to have real conversations on the internet. Kudos to you.

 

[souldoubt]

What does everyone think about Bioware removing class based weapons? I personally did not like how I HAD to choose a extra weapon in the Ghost Ship in ME2, because I chose an Adept I wanted to blast my enemies away with biotic powers over shooting things and I eventually became used to the idea of my adept running around with a assault rifle I never wanted in the first place until I bought the firepower dlc pack and obtained the Mattock Heavy Rifle(which I enjoyed using over the assault rifle and battle rifle).

I am worried about the classes and balancing of my adept (or any other class because I have other then my Adept, a Soldier, an Infiltrator and a Sentinel), since in ME3 he will be running around armed like a soldier and ultimately my soldier will have no use because why should I play her if I can just remake her now into a Vanguard and still use assault and sniper rifles available?

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

I think what all of us want is for Bioware to come out with some concrete details, so we can stop fretting over maybe's and vague statements and instead make clear exactly which parts of what they are doing we do/don't approve of.

This. VERY much this. I HATE not having enough info. It's bad for my blood pressure.

Honestly...I thought ME2's stat system was enough. Each time you upgraded a skill it got a fairly good upgrade. Not to mention you wanted to pump it up to maximum ASAP so you could get an evolved skill.

......Bioware, give us something concrete PLEASE! If you only give us vague information, we are going to start assuming the worst and many people (not me, though) will start condemning the game before it's even out and then they will hate the game even if it's good, and the game will bomb. I do not want that.

Considering Bioware is skating on thin ice after the whole DA2 flame war...They really need to release real info (or some gameplay videos) so quell this unease in the fanbase.

 

[Kahunaburger]

I think what all of us want is for Bioware to come out with some concrete details, so we can stop fretting over maybe's and vague statements and instead make clear exactly which parts of what they are doing we do/don't approve of.

This. VERY much this. I HATE not having enough info. It's bad for my blood pressure.

Honestly...I thought ME2's stat system was enough. Each time you upgraded a skill it got a fairly good upgrade. Not to mention you wanted to pump it up to maximum ASAP so you could get an evolved skill.

......Bioware, give us something concrete PLEASE! If you only give us vague information, we are going to start assuming the worst and many people (not me, though) will start condemning the game before it's even out and then they will hate the game even if it's good, and the game will bomb. I do not want that.

Considering Bioware is skating on thin ice after the whole DA2 flame war...They really need to release real info (or some gameplay videos) so quell this unease in the fanbase.

Well, Christina Norman just put out a post that by "no meaningless stat games" she meant "make stats actually mean something" not "remove stats." It's in the other thread.

 

[Duskflamer]

I was misrepresented in an article recently, which made it sound like I
wanted to remove RPG elements and stats from combat. What I actually
said was, I wanted RPG progression to have a more meaningful impact on
combat, but that was misrepresented as "cutting rpg stats" we actually
have more stats in me3 that affect combat, and the overall impact of rpg
progress on combat is greater. Anyway sorry for the longish tweet but I
just wanted ot clear that up, and a few people were asking me what was
up!

-Christina Norman, Lead Gameplay Designer of Mass Effect 3
Twitter / @Christina Norman: I was misrepresented in an ...

This is incredibly encouraging, thank you for reposting this here.

 

[duchaked]

Love this, anything to piss off traditional gamers amuses me. You can keep your minute level upgrades .01 sec to lift length etc, and exploring baren planets with about 15 textures. I'll take streamlined combat and bioware story over that crap any day.

but I enjoy going through my weapons inventory and upgrading them one by one...micromanaging each and every piece of equipment is so much fun...otherwise you can't call it a role playing game!!

but seriously, I understand the concern people have that the game will become nothing more than a cover based third person shooter (which can be either be dull or great, and ME2's combat portions were the latter), though I can't say I'll ever miss having to spend more time in the menu than in actual gameplay. point being...gameplay should be as little like using microsoft excel spreadsheets as possible

 

[mechanixis]

I actually prefer ME1 to ME2 specifically because it isn't all about the combat...

 

[mechanixis]

I got ME1 because I heard it was a great rpg. After playing ME2 and reading this article, I wonder why they didn't make the entire series a purely shooter based affair.

Sadly, because after they released the first one they realized they could make more money that way.