For every piece of info released on this bloody game, there's a huge flame war in the comments. What is the point of arguing like this? What are you trying to accomplish?
No "Meaningless Stat Games" in Mass Effect 3
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
RPG elements does not only mean percentages, stats, points, and XP. It's just as much gaining new abilities, upgrading a weapon modification like enhanced zoom, or choosing which area you want to explore first. It's about playing the game you want to play it. Not about that extra 25% damage, though that could certainly be an aspect for some people.sneakypenguin said:
I'm seeing a pattern with the "RPG-naysayers", if you will. They seem to think that the "pro-RPG" crowd wants these stupid stats and percentage points to get in the way of the actual game when that is not the case at all. What they (or we, I suppose) want is choices not just in the combat, but in every aspect of the game. The combat is all well and good, but if you only get to hold one type of weapon that you can never upgrade or change until you buy the schematics halfway in the game (I just could not find those submachine guns in ME2, seriously, those things are really annoying to find) then that's pretty limiting for everybody.
They (we) want options. I doubt you'd be against having extra weapon modifications, whether it's increasing damage, ammo clips, or enhanced zoom. It's just better for everyone, I think.
SRPG? If you're asking if I enjoy games with more of those small increases and piddly point allocations every level, I'll say that I do, but what matters to me is if a game is fun and well-designed with a good story, not if it conforms to some arbitrary list of pure RPG features. I think the term RPG can apply to a wide variety of games, even shooters like Mass Effect. But what makes Mass Effect fun to me are the conversations, companions, and story. Since creating compelling game stories has always been BioWare's mission statement, I think they're doing exactly what they've promised, regardless of their changes under the hood. The fact that gamers have lost sight of what's important and pan a good company over things like point allocation and finally getting past pointless loot systems is sad.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
Nope, RPG games were pretty story-light until recently. For the most part RPG's relied on stats to customize you character and this customization made the experience thrilling and personal. You can talk with your friends how one of you went through one dungeon, and different ways to approach it. It was about exploration and despite having no story what so ever the areas weren't any less engaging.ZeZZZZevy said:
Bioware pushed RPG's into a heavy story territory, and this is a good thing, however even without a story a Role-Playing game has much to offer (Darklands, if you need an example).
I can respect that stance, even though I do enjoy the dialogue wheel. All I really care about is the story, and that's what I hope they deliver on.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
This.ZeZZZZevy said:
Unfortunately, the connotation of the term seems to scream out "MATH!" when in reality, it's about assuming the persona of an otherwise blank slate. As long as Bioware ends the trilogy with a blast (both figurative and literal), I could give less of a damn about what they do to the combat (going by this, anyway).
What if we just reclassify Mass Effect as a shooter? Would that make everyone feel better? That's what ME2 was, after all, a conversational shooter, and it worked out very well.
Bioware fans already complained that ME2 was too much shooter and not enough RPG. If it goes so far that you cannot even call it part RPG anymore, there will be massive backlash over it.Andy Chalk said:
Fine with me, if it means people stop getting so worked up. I'll be pissed on principle if I see another user-review bomb over pointless crap. People need to view games as a whole and not based on how well they conform to some preconceived genre notions.Andy Chalk said:
Considering the emerging trend with Bioware games, I'm not sure we'll actually have a good story.ZeZZZZevy said:
Let's consider:
ME1 - Awesome story. Some of the best characters (especially antagonists) in any media. Exceptionally well told and finely crafted.
Dragon Age: Origins - Pretty good story. Sufficiently epic in scope, but incredibly cliche. All-together, well told, if somewhat disjointed at times (especially with DLC).
ME2 - Generally bad story with (sometimes very) good moments. The main storyline made no sense whatsoever, and several situations clearly required at minimum 3 supposedly smart, ruthless and/or driven individuals to make momentously stupid decisions that run directly counter to their goals, not to mention what it did to the Reapers. The individual character arcs were quite good (generally), and there were some truly great moments, but it was decidedly "meh", leaning towards bad, overall.
Dragon Age 2 - Complete shit story. It made absolutely no sense and was disjointed as all hell. There was very little actual coherency to the whole thing and a number of plot points just flat out do not compute. Not to mention the terrible, terrible ending (or the hilarious retconning they did).
From where I sit, it seems fairly clear that ME3 is almost certainly going to have a terrible story. All of Bioware's games since KOTOR have been declining in quality at a fairly steady pace. It drives me up the fucking wall, because I really want them to make good games. Four of their games sit firmly in my "Top 10 Games of All Time" list, and it kills me to see what they've become, but that doesn't change the fact that Bioware is swiftly becoming one of the worst AAA developers in the business.
So, I have to ask. Where did all of you guys get a copy of Mass Effect 3 from? I would sure like one. Then I can play it and join in this discussion about how they ruined the game by making it appeal to more people and what exactly "meaningless behind-the-scenes stat games" means in terms of what they changed. Because all I've got right now is a couple of articles that are so vague that they don't really tell me anything. So please, tell me where I can get a copy of the game so I can play it and join this conversation withe the rest of you.
...Unless none of you played it either, and are all just getting your panties in a twist over some vague statements that currently have no meaning. That would certainly be silly, wouldn't it?
...Unless none of you played it either, and are all just getting your panties in a twist over some vague statements that currently have no meaning. That would certainly be silly, wouldn't it?
That is what I have done. It did work really well. The amount of "RPG of the Year" awards it took home kind of left a bad taste in my mouth. I just want Bioware to admit it is a shooter, and, you know, not bad mouth other types of RPGs.Andy Chalk said:
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.
Im not against a game series chaning its style in some spin off or new series...but for a game about what happins transfers between games, it should not genre jump before the end. If they want to make a crappy ME shooter AFTER Shepard's story is done, fine, go for it. I wont like it but it wont affect me. It sucks to think I likely wont finish my Shepard's story because it changed too much, even if it works for what its doing now. It kind of ruins the big deal about the ME series if no one playing ME3 even played ME1. (Maybe they secretly feel bad for the PS3 ME fans....)Andy Chalk said: