This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Why do so many gamers cry over ME2 and 3 being action RPGs?

#21pothocket(Topic Creator)Posted 11/30/2012 4:56:29 PM
randomweirdo posted...
pothocket posted...
lostoutlawnb posted...
I think the direction they took the gameplay was a good one, than again im not into heavy rpgs, deus ex hr and mass effect games are my favorite rpgs because i spend less time comparing stats and more time playing.


Exactly. The only reason pen-n-paper old school RPGs even have so many stats is because it's a simulation system.

Ok, after working out the calculations, within this "turn" of 5 seconds you can attack twice with an 80% than 60% chance of landing a hit doing between 10-25 damage...

You needed that because it's the only way to simulate real time events on paper - by reducing it to the odds/chances of any given thing happening (then rolling some dice!). But on a machine that can run these simulations IN real time as well as present them to the player in real time...it doesn't make sense to have RPGs be anything other than action RPGs.


And what about games with a party instead of just one character? Action is best for one character, but when you get a party then it comes down to a choice between doing turn based to allow the player control of all actions, or having the rest of the party be controlled by AI that often is going to suck in comparison to actual players. Because a person isn't going to be able to in real time control the actions of multiple characters.



Good point but I'm not a big supporter of the party system. It was only used in the first place to emulate the co-op mechanics of pen-n-paper RPGs. You know, different players with different classes and powers. Video game RPGs could not emulate the interaction of having a DM that could improvise narrative and settings on the fly but they could perfectly emulate dice rolling - so early RPGs focused on the combat and the mechanics of combat. That's how multiple players running one character each turned into one player running multiple characters.

So I'm happy that I can just ignore the rest of my squad in ME2 and focus on my character. For me, playing an RPG means playing ONE character - my character. I don't mind playing a squad in a turn based game but I only want that in tactics games, not in sweeping epic narrative based experiences.
---
well I am not like your dad. I worked as a chef at TGIF-Mattson
#22Firespark1Posted 11/30/2012 5:25:19 PM
to me, borderland 2 got most of the RPG gameplay element down, minus a few plot/story element, even more so than ME2/3
#23sonicteam2k1Posted 11/30/2012 6:39:28 PM
mass effect 2 and 3= third person shooters
---
See The Game Collection
http://www.gamespot.com/users/nights_team2k7/games_table?mode=own
#24Just_The_TipPosted 11/30/2012 7:54:10 PM
People cry about everything, but they did do a little TOO much streamlining in the sequels ( I can only speak for 2, haven't played 3 yet). The 2nd was still an awesome game.
---
Bernard, don't be a tuna head
#25Eamon696Posted 11/30/2012 8:00:03 PM
sonicteam2k1 posted...
mass effect 2 and 3= third person shooters


So was Mass Effect One.
#26The_MadnessPosted 11/30/2012 8:13:51 PM(edited)
Maybe because they fundamentally changed the game in the sequel... It wasn't an adventure/exploration based RPG anymore, but a shooter-based RPG.

Some of us actually enjoyed the exploration aspects of Mass Effect 1. Coupled with a great new story, brilliant level design, superb voice acting etc.

Instead of continuing it, as soon as EA bought it, they pushed their DLC model, online pass, etc.

They removed a lot of customization and unique playing style of the original game. It basically devolved into a sprint-based third person shooter in hallways.

It became like most other third-person shooters out there. They went backwards with their guns as well. It was a relief not having to scout for ammo every two seonds but making sure you learned combat effectively. You paced your shots to prevent overheating, used powers etc.

In Mass Effect 2, all most ended up doing was using assault rifles with warp armor ammo.

Fundamental difference... Being dropped on a planet and having to explore and actually find the tower or entrance etc. In Mass effect 2, you are put at the start of the level and it's basically a sprint to the end. Same formula everytime.

Think of it this way, if ME1 was so poor or bad, why did it win several awards and was considered GOTY when it released? The only reason Mass Effect 2 is so popular is because it was available on PS3 as well.

Had Playstation owners played the first, you'd have millions of more fans experience the wonder of the Citadel for the first time, seeing the Destiny Ascension fly by. Hearing about Protheans, seeing Ilos.

Why do you think so many PS3 players don't even care about Ashley or Wrex? They didn't build that same bond during ME1. That's why Garrus and Tali and Legion became so popular as well.