Things that sequels are adding that you think they should'nt.

[JoshFTL]

I personally think that the Gears Of War franchise has nothing else it could do in a sequel. Cliffy 'Dont call me cliffy b' B states that in Gears 3 Epic will be adding some RPG elements to the single player campaign and possibly even the multiplayer, a-la Call Of Duty 4 etc.

This seems like an extreme deviation from the general Gears gameplay and I really cant see how they could incorporate it into the game. I am still going to buy the shit out of Gears 3 mind you, but it just seems rather odd to have RPG stuff in it.

So what are your thoughts on this general subjectery??

 

[Kilaknux]

I've never really understood the need to add RPG elements to EVERYTHING. This may be why I'm not a games developer. Ah, well.
Something I think is utterly unnecessary is the multiplayer for Bioshock 2. I haven't heard much about this in recent times, but Bioshock is one game that would definitley not be improved with the addition of multiplayer. Ever.

 

[Pink Gregory]

Depending on elements that ARE introduced, it could work, technically in very broad (VERY broad) terms, being able to select weapons by way of what you pick up is an RPG element; can't really justify releasing it as a full game rather than an expansion or DLC unless there's a little bit of development, liiiike the addition of horde in gears 2.

 

[thebloo]

Soft RPG does not equal RPG, so it could work. Think Wolverine. Not the best example, but it's recent enough.

Edit: I had the same thoughts about Bioshock 2 Multi until I started thinking on the Plasmids and weapons and the chaos of the fights. And if the Single part is not affected... who cares?

 

[Kilaknux]

Soft RPG does not equal RPG, so it could work. Think Wolverine. Not the best example, but it's recent enough.

Edit: I had the same thoughts about Bioshock 2 Multi until I started thinking on the Plasmids and weapons and the chaos of the fights. And if the Single part is not affected... who cares?

If it's crap, I won't play the multi, of course. But if the game mechanics haven't changed much, and they don't look like they have, then multiplayer will be very, VERY boring.

 

[JoshFTL]

I've never really understood the need to add RPG elements to EVERYTHING. This may be why I'm not a games developer. Ah, well.
Something I think is utterly unnecessary is the multiplayer for Bioshock 2. I haven't heard much about this in recent times, but Bioshock is one game that would definitley not be improved with the addition of multiplayer. Ever.

Bioshock 2 could not be improved by multiplayer, but it would not make it worse. I heard that the multiplayer aspect was designed by another team to the single player so it should not hinder the campaigns length or depth.


So apperantly Bioshock 2 is a form of geomotry...

 

[scnj]

I personally think that the Gears Of War franchise has nothing else it could do in a sequel. Cliffy 'Dont call me cliffy b' B states that in Gears 3 Epic will be adding some RPG elements to the single player campaign and possibly even the multiplayer, a-la Call Of Duty 4 etc.

I thought he said that FPS/RPG hybrids were the way forward, but not necessarily for the Gears series?

My vote would be dual wielding in Modern Warfare 2. I just don't see the need for it. When playing as Master Chief, an enhanced super soldier it's believable, but how many average soldiers do you hear of shooting up terrorists with dual pistols?

 

[Avaholic03]

I think the term "RPG elements" gets thrown around way too much. Getting a gun upgrade for reaching a certain level is not a RPG element...that's just a way to make a FPS more addicting.

But my guess is Gears just wants as much money as they can get. I don't think adding some "RPG elements" will drive away as many fans as it will attract. In other words, it'll lead to a net gain in sales. And that's the bottom line isn't it?

 

[JoshFTL]

I think the term "RPG elements" gets thrown around way too much. Getting a gun upgrade for reaching a certain level is not a RPG element...that's just a way to make a FPS more addicting.

But my guess is Gears just wants as much money as they can get. I don't think adding some "RPG elements" will drive away as many fans as it will attract. In other words, it'll lead to a net gain in sales. And that's the bottom line isn't it?

Hmmm good point, the so-called RPG elements should be gun upgrades (rate of fire, larger clip) and not full on leveling system and stats, although I think none of us should of thought that they would actualy turn Gears into a gory version of FInal Fantasy...

 

[Legion]

Something I think is utterly unnecessary is the multiplayer for Bioshock 2. I haven't heard much about this in recent times, but Bioshock is one game that would definitley not be improved with the addition of multiplayer. Ever.

True, but remember that the multi player is being created by a separate team so as not to compromise the single player.

that's just a way to make a FPS more addicting.

Addictive, addicting is not a real word.

My vote would be dual wielding in Modern Warfare 2. I just don't see the need for it. When playing as Master Chief, an enhanced super soldier it's believable, but how many average soldiers do you hear of shooting up terrorists with dual pistols?

Especially Desert Eagles, which are hard enough to shoot one of. To be honest, dual wielding is pointless unless you can aim at multiple targets, it's the only advantage (in realistic settings). Although in Halo it worked because you could mix and match weapons which was great.

 

[Durahan2]

RPG means roll playing game. So technically anything that lets you play a roll is an RPG. Only in the technical sense. I'm a big RPG fan. So as long as it doesn't ruin the game play, which is rarely does, I'm all for it.

Oh gears could do so much more with it's multiplayer. One fix the goddamn shotgun, two make the game's coding not shotty and rickety. Honestly there is so much double-standard bullshit in gear's multiplayer I can't even play it anymore. But yes, GoW's weapon system is pick up on the battlefield. EXP system won't really go along with that.

 

[Player 2]

Getting rid of being able to play normal co-op and only including LIVE or PSN co-op so that you can't play the game with somebody who's actually in the room.

 

[Clashero]

I think the term "RPG elements" gets thrown around way too much. Getting a gun upgrade for reaching a certain level is not a RPG element...that's just a way to make a FPS more addicting.

But my guess is Gears just wants as much money as they can get. I don't think adding some "RPG elements" will drive away as many fans as it will attract. In other words, it'll lead to a net gain in sales. And that's the bottom line isn't it?

Hmmm good point, the so-called RPG elements should be gun upgrades (rate of fire, larger clip) and not full on leveling system and stats, although I think none of us should of thought that they would actualy turn Gears into a gory version of FInal Fantasy...

I suppose that when game devs refer to RPG elements they mean "skills that improve over time", forgetting the whole, you know, role-playing aspect.

 

[Clashero]

RPG means roll playing game. So technically anything that lets you play a roll is an RPG. Only in the technical sense. I'm a big RPG fan. So as long as it doesn't ruin the game play, which is rarely does, I'm all for it.

Oh gears could do so much more with it's multiplayer. One fix the goddamn shotgun, two make the game's coding not shotty and rickety. Honestly there is so much double-standard bullshit in gear's multiplayer I can't even play it anymore. But yes, GoW's weapon system is pick up on the battlefield. EXP system won't really go along with that.

The thing is, most games that add "role-playing elements" don't add any role-playing at all. It's all "get on the rails or die".

 

[-Drifter-]

I'd say the most needless 'improvement' to Gears 2 would be the story. Gears never struck me as a game that needed a very complex, moving story. What was there was pretty basic, but it worked to move the action along. Now, in Gears 2, there's a great big melodramatic story that takes itself way too seriously. It's more annoying than moving.

 

[-Drifter-]

Getting rid of being able to play normal co-op and only including LIVE or PSN co-op so that you can't play the game with somebody who's actually in the room.

I've never understood why developers suddenly decided that "no-one wants to play split screen anyway, it should be removed." It pisses me off even more with Xbox games, because it means that if I want to play with anyone else, I have to pay a monthly fee.

 

[Et3rnalLegend64]

Getting rid of being able to play normal co-op and only including LIVE or PSN co-op so that you can't play the game with somebody who's actually in the room.

Definitely this. We've played 4 player split screen before, haven't we? If I had 4 controllers and 3 friends, why can't we go on a rampage in Halo 3? What if I don't have Live?

 

[Canadamus Prime]

How about the whole "sequel" element. That's sure an unnecessary one.

 

[Durahan2]

My vote would be dual wielding in Modern Warfare 2. I just don't see the need for it. When playing as Master Chief, an enhanced super soldier it's believable, but how many average soldiers do you hear of shooting up terrorists with dual pistols?

Eh dude, dual wielding pistols is easy. People in the late 1900s did it, why can't soldiers do it now? Sure you're aim will be off but basically if you can shoot one pistol you can shoot two.

The thing is, most games that add "role-playing elements" don't add any role-playing at all. It's all "get on the rails or die".

You are playing a role, the role of a gear(for gears of war) or a soldier for whatever. Just because it's not the role of some jrpg chosen one, doesn't mean you're not playing a role.

 

[Clashero]

My vote would be dual wielding in Modern Warfare 2. I just don't see the need for it. When playing as Master Chief, an enhanced super soldier it's believable, but how many average soldiers do you hear of shooting up terrorists with dual pistols?

Eh dude, dual wielding pistols is easy. People in the late 1900s did it, why can't soldiers do it now? Sure you're aim will be off but basically if you can shoot one pistol you can shoot two.

The thing is, most games that add "role-playing elements" don't add any role-playing at all. It's all "get on the rails or die".

You are playing a role, the role of a gear(for gears of war) or a soldier for whatever. Just because it's not the role of some jrpg chosen one, doesn't mean you're not playing a role.

Actually, dual-wielding pistols is very very difficult, not to mention impractical. It's almost impossible, if not downright crazy, to try to reload two pistols during a gunfight. In competitions, you get points for style, but your aim will be terrible. The only way you could fire two pistols is by pretty much blind-firing, since your eyes will never be in the right place to aim down the sights of both guns.

And no, by your logic in tetris you play the role of the invisible hand that moves bricks, and in Arkanoid you play the role of a paddle. As many proper role-players would tell you, there isn't a single roleplaying video game in existence, although some would argue that the first two Fallouts and Mass Effect come close. You don't play a role in Gears, because its gameplay philosophy is "get on the rails or die".
And JRPG's are pretty far from being roleplaying games as well. Improving stats over time doesn't equal being a RPG.

If you want to see what real roleplaying is, go play D&D, Vampire, MERP, Runequest, or whatever pen-and-paper game strikes your fancy.

Getting rid of being able to play normal co-op and only including LIVE or PSN co-op so that you can't play the game with somebody who's actually in the room.

I've never understood why developers suddenly decided that "no-one wants to play split screen anyway, it should be removed." It pisses me off even more with Xbox games, because it means that if I want to play with anyone else, I have to pay a monthly fee.

Precisely this. I play Gears of War for huge, stupid fun. If I want an emotional story, I'll go play The Longest Journey for the millionth time.