Poll: Who Do You Think is Best RPGs Between Bioware, Square Enix, and Bethesda?

[Kahunaburger]

When I say "freedom" in a game I think of how I'm going to play. I'm going to go berserk? Stealthy? Long distance? Magic (or whatever other options there are)?

Am I going to save this guy? Am I going to explore that building? Is it necesary to kill this guy? Do I need to wear this armor to defeat the boss? Is everything I do scripted?

By that definition, TF2 blows every RPG I've played out of the water in terms of player freedom.

EDIT: The point is that freedom in RPGs is defined by choice and consequences, not just choice. The problem with Bethesada RPGs is a massive lack of consequence for everything you do.

Herp derp, I take these words and put them totally out of context and I instantly win the conversation, I'm such a genius.

You know what my point was, don't try to tergiversate

Did you read the edit? The point I was making was about consequences. Bethesada RPGs offer basically nothing in the way of consequences. You can choose a bunch of different character builds, but you can do that in basically any game these days.

 

[prince_xedar]

i have to say bioware for Dat mass effect and Dat Dragon age origins plus Baldors gate and KOTOR

 

[prince_xedar]

Square Enix against Bioware and Bethesda? *bursts out laughing* Oh wait you were serious..i'll laugh even harder. *BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!*

That's just going by their latest 'masterpeices'. If we're going by body of work then yeah...it's more of a fair fight...kinda.

Edit: Incase I wasn't being clear the upper comments are both directed at Square.

Boring empty monotone open world-but-still-linear game versus mediocre "nonlinear" space opera third person shooter/mediocre "nonlinear" grimdark hack and slash?

Shit, Square Enix has some serious competition.

At least the Main character isn't a copy pasted self doubting emo git.

At least Square Enix games manage to be

Spoiler

fun.

But that's just my opinion.

mashing X(Or A for Xbox) is your idea of fun?
FFXIII was horrible

 

[thePyro_13]

Square for me, i prefer JRPG's, as they tend to hold my attention better than the sandbox style games(the repetition and lack or direction just doesn't work for me). Dragon Quest for the win!

I'd give Bioware second place, due to never-winter nights and mass effect. I feel NWN is the only real attempt to make a good PC DnD game(due to the actual GM features in multiplayer) and I just enjoyed Mass effect(it was somewhat free roam, but it had good direction so I never felt like I was just spinning my wheels as far as the plot goes).

I hate oblivion with a passion(it represents everything that is wrong with RPG games(IMO), so boo on Bethesda.

 

[sergnb]

When I say "freedom" in a game I think of how I'm going to play. I'm going to go berserk? Stealthy? Long distance? Magic (or whatever other options there are)?

Am I going to save this guy? Am I going to explore that building? Is it necesary to kill this guy? Do I need to wear this armor to defeat the boss? Is everything I do scripted?

By that definition, TF2 blows every RPG I've played out of the water in terms of player freedom.

EDIT: The point is that freedom in RPGs is defined by choice and consequences, not just choice. The problem with Bethesada RPGs is a massive lack of consequence for everything you do.

Herp derp, I take these words and put them totally out of context and I instantly win the conversation, I'm such a genius.

You know what my point was, don't try to tergiversate

Did you read the edit? The point I was making was about consequences. Bethesada RPGs offer basically nothing in the way of consequences. You can choose a bunch of different character builds, but you can do that in basically any game these days.

Well I do agree with that, the story was pretty much rigged. The freedom relied on wether or not you would explore the world, and that did have indeed consequences. Consequences in equipment, character development, knowledge of the world, experience (that's granted tho), exploration and the subsequent rewards that you got from it...

You can't really say that from many games. I certainly haven't been so "free" in a game except with Oblivion and Morrowind. And maybe San Andreas and just cause 2 too. And all of those games had a clearly determined path that you had to follow, no matter what you did or not did during the the time inbetween main quest missions.

 

[bob1052]

Bioware and SE haven't made a decent game in years.

 

[Arsen]

Square is good for the younger crowd. Their games get you into the concept of RPG's without making you dive too deeply in. However, they've been constantly going downhill since '97. Can't think of a single title beyond Tactics, Vagrant Story, and Parasite Eve that's worthy of mention.

Bioware has some of the best games in memory. I love how they make you choose in the KotoR games. Your character will never be overpowered. You have to figure out just the right balance in developing your skills otherwise you end up making bad choices that effect your ability to play. Makes you really consider them in depth.

Bethesda gets my vote in the end. The open world gameplay, innovative options, weapons, classes, etc. make it all worthwhile for me. Bring on Skyrim!

 

[Polaris19]

Some Spoilers may be ahead, most are years old so I'm not wrapping them in tags, just avoid them if possible if you haven't played Knights of the Old Republic or The Elder Scrolls games or Mass Effect

These days I don't even know if Square Enix is even relevant anymore. I haven't really heard anything super positive about Final Fantasy or any other Square developed games for awhile. And after the past two games (13 and 14) it is clear they have some things to make up for.

So that leaves Bioware and Bethesda and honestly it comes down to preference between these two. Bethesda is essentially the king of the open world. They have made their RPG's around the ability to go anywhere and do anything you feel like doing, and they have gotten really good at giving you incredibly detailed worlds to do it in. Bioware has always been about epic stories and moments that blow us away. Your character turning out to be a former Sith in KotOR, The Normandy's destruction in the opening moments of Mass Effect 2. Those are just two of millions of moments that I remember.

Bioware and Bethesda are both very good at building detailed worlds with lots of back story. The Elder Scrolls has books and lore that you can read, and Mass Effect and Dragon Age have the Codex which functions much the same.

So pretty much, story or open world to do whatever in.

I like my stories, and Bioware has only once disappointed me in nearly 15 years. Bethesda has never truly disappointed me, but there are some things I wish they'd fix in their games or do differently.

So Bioware for me.

 

[Kahunaburger]

When I say "freedom" in a game I think of how I'm going to play. I'm going to go berserk? Stealthy? Long distance? Magic (or whatever other options there are)?

Am I going to save this guy? Am I going to explore that building? Is it necesary to kill this guy? Do I need to wear this armor to defeat the boss? Is everything I do scripted?

By that definition, TF2 blows every RPG I've played out of the water in terms of player freedom.

EDIT: The point is that freedom in RPGs is defined by choice and consequences, not just choice. The problem with Bethesada RPGs is a massive lack of consequence for everything you do.

Herp derp, I take these words and put them totally out of context and I instantly win the conversation, I'm such a genius.

You know what my point was, don't try to tergiversate

Did you read the edit? The point I was making was about consequences. Bethesada RPGs offer basically nothing in the way of consequences. You can choose a bunch of different character builds, but you can do that in basically any game these days.

Well I do agree with that, the story was pretty much rigged. The freedom relied on wether or not you would explore the world, and that did have indeed consequences. Consequences in equipment, character development, knowledge of the world, experience (that's granted tho), exploration and the subsequent rewards that you got from it...

You can't really say that from many games. I certainly haven't been so "free" in a game except with Oblivion and Morrowind. And maybe San Andreas and just cause 2 too. And all of those games had a clearly determined path that you had to follow, no matter what you did or not did during the the time inbetween main quest missions.

Those aren't really "consequences," in the same sense that your choices in something like Planescape: Torment has consequences. Going back to the TF2 example, it offers pretty much everything you listed.

Equipment? The achievements you unlock dictate what equipment you unlock, as does crafting, so check.
Character development? Your character and build are things I'd categorize as more of a choice, and a choice that TF2 offers in spades.
Knowledge of the world? That's a consequence that every game offers.
Experience? Once again, TF2 has this through the achievement = stuff mechanic.
Exploration? TF2 actually has more consequence in terms of your ability to explore the world than Oblivion does.

The point here isn't that TF2 is a marvel of choice and consequence, because it isn't. The point here is to demonstrate that pretty much every consequence that Oblivion offers is offered by many games that we wouldn't remotely consider RPGs.

 

[AngryBritishAce]

I choose Bethesda, but I'm not annoyed BioWare got more votes. They both make awesome games at the end of the day, it was a hard descision to make.

 

[Defense]

Square Enix against Bioware and Bethesda? *bursts out laughing* Oh wait you were serious..i'll laugh even harder. *BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!*

That's just going by their latest 'masterpeices'. If we're going by body of work then yeah...it's more of a fair fight...kinda.

Edit: Incase I wasn't being clear the upper comments are both directed at Square.

Boring empty monotone open world-but-still-linear game versus mediocre "nonlinear" space opera third person shooter/mediocre "nonlinear" grimdark hack and slash?

Shit, Square Enix has some serious competition.

At least the Main character isn't a copy pasted self doubting emo git.

At least Square Enix games manage to be

Spoiler

fun.

But that's just my opinion.

mashing X(Or A for Xbox) is your idea of fun?
FFXIII was horrible

Make poor argument
Give opinion

Congratulations, you're a quality poster. No, I actually didn't use Auto-Battle because I wasn't a lazy bastard, and I had much more fun with it because I was pressured to choose my choices quickly and manage my team.

In any case, my experience was certainly more engaging than holding down RT.

 

[prince_xedar]

Square Enix against Bioware and Bethesda? *bursts out laughing* Oh wait you were serious..i'll laugh even harder. *BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!*

That's just going by their latest 'masterpeices'. If we're going by body of work then yeah...it's more of a fair fight...kinda.

Edit: Incase I wasn't being clear the upper comments are both directed at Square.

Boring empty monotone open world-but-still-linear game versus mediocre "nonlinear" space opera third person shooter/mediocre "nonlinear" grimdark hack and slash?

Shit, Square Enix has some serious competition.

At least the Main character isn't a copy pasted self doubting emo git.

At least Square Enix games manage to be

Spoiler

fun.

But that's just my opinion.

mashing X(Or A for Xbox) is your idea of fun?
FFXIII was horrible

Make poor argument
Give opinion

Congratulations, you're a quality poster. No, I actually didn't use Auto-Battle because I wasn't a lazy bastard, and I had much more fun with it because I was pressured to choose my choices quickly and manage my team.

In any case, my experience was certainly more engaging than holding down RT.

it isnt just the combat system that makes FFXIII a terrible RPG. Its over halfway through the game before you are given any sort of freedom, you cant even choose your combat team until chapter 9, that isnt very RPGish is it? Also the characters arent very engaging, You have Captain Douchebag, Stone Lady, Cry Baby, and the Australians. Oh and Sazh, but ill exclude him from this, because he atleast has some personality

 

[SeriousIssues]

Urgh. Mass Effect 2 is vastly overrated.
Awesome, but it doesn't come close to sliced bread.

 

[nyysjan]

Bioware.

Bethesda makes good sandboxes but fail at npc interactions and storytelling.

Square Enix can write decent stories and characters (but have been steadily going downhill imo), but the games themselves become more and more boring and linear (story may be nice, but playing the game in order to get to it is a chore instead of fun).

Bioware however, does awesome characters (altough they have their misses as well), interesting worlds, good storylines and have decent playability on top of it.
Altough i admit that with the total disaster of DA2, and slight dissapointment of MA2 i have worries about them as well, hopefully SW:TOR and ME3 will blow me away and restore my confidence in my favorite game developer.

 

[Defense]

Square Enix against Bioware and Bethesda? *bursts out laughing* Oh wait you were serious..i'll laugh even harder. *BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!*

That's just going by their latest 'masterpeices'. If we're going by body of work then yeah...it's more of a fair fight...kinda.

Edit: Incase I wasn't being clear the upper comments are both directed at Square.

Boring empty monotone open world-but-still-linear game versus mediocre "nonlinear" space opera third person shooter/mediocre "nonlinear" grimdark hack and slash?

Shit, Square Enix has some serious competition.

At least the Main character isn't a copy pasted self doubting emo git.

At least Square Enix games manage to be

Spoiler

fun.

But that's just my opinion.

mashing X(Or A for Xbox) is your idea of fun?
FFXIII was horrible

Make poor argument
Give opinion

Congratulations, you're a quality poster. No, I actually didn't use Auto-Battle because I wasn't a lazy bastard, and I had much more fun with it because I was pressured to choose my choices quickly and manage my team.

In any case, my experience was certainly more engaging than holding down RT.

it isnt just the combat system that makes FFXIII a terrible RPG. Its over halfway through the game before you are given any sort of freedom, you cant even choose your combat team until chapter 9, that isnt very RPGish is it? Also the characters arent very engaging, You have Captain Douchebag, Stone Lady, Cry Baby, and the Australians. Oh and Sazh, but ill exclude him from this, because he atleast has some personality

I never mentioned anything about it being an RPG. Stop spouting that linearity bullshit please, because it actually works considering the narrative of the game. You're not supposed to take your time on Cocoon considering you're hated and hunted by everyone. Bethesda games and recent Bioware games are just as linear, the only difference being that they give you a choice that doesn't have any impact.

Also, that's your opinion. I didn't care for any character in any Bethesda or Bioware game(except Garrus), but I liked the cast of FFXIII overall despite the archetype being done before.

 

[Ascarus]

for sheer enjoyment, i would go with bioware as i have re-played their titles far more than i have bethesdas.

but for sheer freedom, bethesda takes the cake.

square enix sucks imo.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Please point out the choice in Oblivion's main quest, because I didn't see it. Also pease show me the choice in the main guilds in Oblivion too

You don't even have to play that shit. At all. You're thinking too small. This is lost somewhat in Oblivion, but Elder Scrolls games give you a shit ton of content so you can play different characters and tackle different challenges. In Morrowind, for example, you couldn't even complete the guild quests at all unless you were actually strong in the appropriate areas. You arrive in a big world with lots to do. GO. That's actual meaningful choice. Not just swapping out cut scenes. And because your choice of character actually changes the game play, you can experience the same main quest many different ways.

Well you pretty much just avoided my question there, however, I never said the guilds in Morrowind were bad, I was only talking about Oblivion. Once again you avoided my question and tried to chnage the subject.

Your question could easily have been interpreted as rhetorical, as there is only one obvious answer. There is no story-line choice in the main quest in Oblivion. I chose to address the issue I thought you were driving at rather than answer your apparently rhetorical question. I brought up Morrowind because I thought doing so helped explain what I was trying to say about making choices in Oblivion

Outside of being convenient at the moment for anyone who doesn't like Bethesda, that doesn't make sense. It sounds insecure, actually. We can make inferences based on what we know of unfinished projects to rate a developer. If I thought Bethesda was doing something absolutely pig-headed with Skyrim, it would obviously influence my opinion of them as RPG developers. If that were the case, I doubt people who don't like Bethesda would be saying "unreleased projects don't count". They have announced a lot of very well thought out and positive changes to their Elder Scrolls formula, so they're getting good marks from me. >dealwithit.jpeg

It makes perfect sense: Skyrim has not been released so we don't know if it will be good or bad, whether it will have a lot of choice or not, whether the writing will be good or the story.

And no it isn't being insecure, I'm hoping that Skyrim will be good, I really want it to be. However, it hasn't been released yet so I can't judge t and I'm not the kind to blindly follow hype.

It's true we don't know if it will be good or bad, but that doesn't mean we cannot approve or disapprove of the direction they seem to be taking the series. If they told me Skyrim was going to be an Asteroid clone with a fantasy theme, I personally wouldn't be saying "well, let's just wait and see". I'd be calling them completely batshit bonkers.

 

[robert01]

Bioware gets my vote.

Bethesda releases games that are good, but they are buggy as all hell, and they never get fixed until the community does it.

Square Enix used to make good games back when I was in grade school. That was some 15 years ago. Almost every RPG they produce any more is nothing but shit.

Bioware although they have slipped into their games as of late, at least they still their game world insane amount of character and depth. That and their games don't crash when I enter combat, enter a room, run too fast between cells .. you get the point.

 

[Vakz]

Depends.. BioWare used to make A-M-A-Z-I-N-G RPGs, but lately, I'm not so sure. No doubt Mass Effect is good, but as an RPG, I wouldn't say so, not compared to Fallout and Oblivion. Voted Bethesda.

 

[Ventilator89]

I'll vote for bioware. oblivion and morrowind I never really enjoyed, their story lines are pretty meh, and the combat wasn't my thing. doesn't mean I wont try skyrim thought =)

Captcha- in the box