The Mass Effect comparisons must get annoying

[Wrath of Dagon]

I'm glad you see my point. As far as providing reasons, I did link to my review already for those who are interested.

 

It's always frustrating to see that most people on forums seem to have missed the day in elementary school when they explained the difference between opinions and facts. Jenny wears a green dress - fact; Jenny is pretty - opinion.

[Redfield]

I'm glad you see my point. As far as providing reasons, I did link to my review already for those who are interested.

 

It's always frustrating to see that most people on forums seem to have missed the day in elementary school when they explained the difference between opinions and facts. Jenny wears a green dress - fact; Jenny is pretty - opinion.

 

Actually, it's:

 

"Jenny is pretty. It's my opinion, but if you don't see it, you're wrong." -WoD

[Wrath of Dagon]

That too. My taste is beyond reproach.

[Cycloneman]

Heh, looks like Cycloneman outsmarted you, even if he just provided a recollection of the element(s) common to the games that you listed, rather than a meaningful definition of "RPG" (which, given the premises, I would think impossible). Kudos to him.

 

It's cool that you're willing to put your money where your mouth is, though.

RPGs are fundamentally distinguished from other games by leveling up elements. I merely provided a definition of the leveling up element that carefully excluded RPGs from other games with RPG/accumulation aspects.

 

I'm sure Cycloneman's definition will pick up some interesting games into its definition (i.e. BG&E maybe?), but looks pretty impressive.

Yeah, it would seem as though BG&E uses a leveling up system similar to that of Deus Ex, only you can grind and you have to go to shops to level up various skills (HP, powered up blast strength, whatever).

 

I guess the idea of the "shop" being associated with the leveling up process might be a good add-on, but whatever, I'm not getting free stuff for this any more.

Edited July 22, 2008 by Cycloneman

[Hell Kitty]

And I've yet to see anyone explain why the faults I pointed out aren't faults.

 

Because they aren't faults, they're things you don't like, and that's not something something anyone can argue with.

 

Fact: This product is poorly designed.

Opinion: I don't like this for some reason.

 

Of course at this point it's obvious you are just trolling.

[random n00b]

That too. My taste is beyond reproach.

Sure it is. Just like everyone else's.

[random n00b]

RPGs are fundamentally distinguished from other games by leveling up elements. I merely provided a definition of the leveling up element that carefully excluded RPGs from other games with RPG/accumulation aspects.

What, like the promotions in BF2 that earn you better gear?

 

You won the challenge as it was proposed by (smartly) adhering to the letter strictly - which was probably the only way to meet the stated requisites, I'm not disputing that. But as far as the descriptive aspect of a definition goes, it leaves a lot to be desired.

Edited July 22, 2008 by random n00b

[Cycloneman]

What, like the promotions earned in BF2 that earn you better gear?

Yes, if that aspect was included in a PvE game (or, I suppose, a MMOFPS with significant PvE elements), it would be called an FPS RPG or MMOFPSRPG.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

Just because you've taken the opinion of a few journalists that "AP looks similar to ME" to mean that both games must share all of the boons/flaws of the other, doesn't mean that it's true.

 

There is no MAKO in AP, if that makes anyone feel better.

 

*cries tears of joy*

 

Though I would have settled for a helicopter.

[Zoma]

I think BF2 is a bad comparison for an FPS RPG.

 

Anyone still remembers the game "Strife", an FPS DOS game based on the Doom engine? You can buy upgrades, buy weapons, buy armor, explore levels and make decisions IG that will result in three different endings.

 

While there are RPG elements in it, the gameplay largely plays similar to Doom which involves strafe quick shooting.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strife_%28video_game%29

[GhostofAnakin]

To avoid endlessly repeating myself, here's my review on Bio forums, towards the bottom of the page: http://masseffect.bioware.com/forums/viewt...=125&sp=285 The fundamental problem as I said is that ME is too linear to offer any meaningful player choice. If you want every single flaw pointed out, you can read the parody in my signature. Amazingly though the author thinks the game is brilliant.

 

While it's good you finally expanded on your reasonings, I think you're a bit dismissive of the choices the player has available to him/her during your breakdown of the game. You kept insisting that there aren't many (I believe you even used "any") chances to actually make choices for your character, and are instead pulled along on the ride without having to make a decision. That's oversimplifying it to a large degree.

 

I will state, in case you think otherwise, that I, too, had many issues with the final product of Mass Effect. However, I'd never suggest it wasn't an RPG. In my opinion, it simply wasn't as good an RPG as it could have been.

[Moatilliatta]

Isn't the point of genres that they're supposed to be loose criterias? If so then Patrick's problem doesn't have a solution.

 

My opinion:

 

To determine genre your aproach shouldn't be to look at all gameplay systems and determine it from them, but rather to look at which systems permeate the game. These systems are then compared to earlier established archetypes to figure out which genre the game belong to.

 

Now I'm gonna test part 1 of my "system" against Patricks lists of games for fun and the extremely remote chance of profitting from writing on a forum:

 

I'm gonna rely on wikipedia for the games that suck games that I haven't played so I might be wrong on some accounts.

 

For clarification: Characters == Player controlled characters; dungeon map == anything that isn't an overworld map

 

Final Fantasy 7 traits:

Exploration: overworld map;dungeon map

Battles: seperate from exploration; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: interactive

Characters: Fleshed out; intertwined with plot; no skill progression interaction

 

Diablo II traits:

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: non interactive

Characters: fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

WoW traits:

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: non interactive

Characters: fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

Fallout

Exploration: overworld map;dungeon map

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: interactive

Characters: fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

Planescape: Torment traits:

Exploration: overworld map;dungeon map

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: interactive

Characters: fleshed out; intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

Baldur's Gate 2

Exploration: overworld map;dungeon map

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: interactive

Characters: fleshed out; intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: non interactive

Characters: fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

EVE Online

Exploration: More than one map (guesswork based on wikipedia hereafter [GBoW])

battles: seperate from exploring [GBoW]; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: non interactive [GBoW]

Characters: fleshed out; not intertwined with plot [GBoW]; skill progression interaction

 

Oblivion

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: non interactive

Characters: fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

System Shock 2

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: non interactive

Characters: fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

Deus Ex

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: interactive

Characters: fleshed out; intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

Mass Effect

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; skill based

Plot: interactive

Characters: fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; skill progression interaction

 

DooM

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; not skill based

Plot: not interactive

Characters: not fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; no skill progression

 

Quake 2

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; not skill based

Plot: not interactive

Characters: not fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; no skill progression

 

Battlefield 2

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; not skill based

Plot: not interactive

Characters: fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; no skill progression

 

Warcraft 3

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; sometimes skill based

Plot: not interactive

Characters: fleshed out; intertwined with plot; skill progression limited to characters that operate similarly to 'units'

 

Call of Duty 4

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; not skill based

Plot: not interactive

Characters: fleshed out; intertwined with plot; skill progression

 

Assassin's Creed

Exploration: single map for everything

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; not skill based

Plot: not interactive [GBoW]

Characters: fleshed out; intertwined with plot; no skill progression

 

Soul Caliber

Exploration: nonexistant

battles: not seperate from exploring; consisting of fleshed out characters; great degree of control over tactics; not skill based

Plot: not interactive [GBoW]

Characters: fleshed out; intertwined with plot; no skill progression

 

Gran Turismo

Exploration: single screen

battles: nonexistant

Plot: not interactive

Characters: not fleshed out; not intertwined with plot; no skill progression

 

Magic: The Gathering Online

Exploration: nonexistant

battles: nonexistant

Plot: nonexistant

Characters: nonexistant

What does this game consist of?: playing cardgames over the interweb

 

 

What did you intend to prove by going through all of that?:

Nothing. What i intended to do was try and show that a game cannot be diluded into binary labels in an attempt to fit it into some genre.

 

Doesn't this mean that your "system" doesn't work?:

No. What this means is that the second part of my "system" to the way we determine genres as the first part, which consists identifying permeating gameplay designs, isn't enough to properly identify a games genre.

 

 

A closer look at genres:

First of all let me clarify that I'm gonna be working from a materialist-dualist view on what exists as those are in my opinion the most likely candidates for being right, has the least problems and they both tell us that the games that we play consists only of matter and that there are no such thing as 'ideas' in the platonic sense.

 

Genres must neccessarily be ideas formed by the human mind. We all have the idea that there are genres because it is commonly accepted in society and as such most people will accept it as well. Does this mean that we all have the same ideas about what a genre is, which genres there are and how they are defined? No, definately not. This is because the idea of genres will necessarily have to pass through language, either written or spoken, in order to pass from one individual to another. This is inherently problematic as language is inherently limited and as such cannot properly convey the idea of the genre in a single attempt. Let's use two then! No, to properly agree on the idea of genres humans would have to spend an infinite amount of time on finding the answer through dialectic and since humans have a finite lifespan to agree completely on the idea of genres is inherently impossible.

 

What does this mean then?:

This means that the idea that I, Patrick or anyone else can define what an RPG is is inherently untrue and that we can't rely on something like that to define what is an RPG and what isn't.

 

So genres are impossible and all of this is pointless?:

No, I'm definitely not saying that as that would make this whole post pointless and it ain't. What I'm saying is that we can't and shouldn't rely on ideas of what genres are and instead should rely on something that we can actually understand; that which already is. That which is is a good way to figure out genres as it is easy to recognise completely for humans as it is a simple matter of recognizing an object (say Baldurs Gate II) and recognizing the label that we have already put on it (RPG), simple and very much possible.

 

So you're saying that we can establish absolute genre truth through this system?:

No, genres are ideas and as such inherently opinions. This means that thruth is a non-problem as it doesn't exist Vis-

[random n00b]

Yes, if that aspect was included in a PvE game (or, I suppose, a MMOFPS with significant PvE elements), it would be called an FPS RPG or MMOFPSRPG.

Why the PvE thing?

 

Anyway, I think Planetside and Hellgate: London are both good examples of games that comply with the "definition" you provided (and would fit in Patrick's list), while still failing miserably at being RPGs.

 

That's what you get when you ask people to square the circle!

 

EDIT: One "both" too many.

 

 

I think BF2 is a bad comparison for an FPS RPG.

That's because it's *not* an RPG. Edited July 22, 2008 by random n00b

[Wrath of Dagon]

@Ghost

OK, so the truest RPG's have all kinds of C&C, you can affect the entire story, have multiple approaches to everything, etc. I haven't actually played any of those. Then you take a step back, you can't really affect the story very much, but the game is made up of quests, and you do have a couple of ways of completing the quest, so you still have some choice. That would be KOTOR. Then you take another step back, and almost all your choices are limited to dialog and its immediate aftermath, because the structure of the game is too linear to accomodate anything else. Sure there are some quests, but almost all are bad. That's Mass Effect.

Edited July 22, 2008 by Wrath of Dagon

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

I think BF2 is a bad comparison for an FPS RPG.

That's because it's *not* an RPG.

 

I have to agree here, if BF2 is an RPG then we've made the definition too vague... which I think we're already doing.

[Cycloneman]

Why the PvE thing?

 

Anyway, I think both Planetside and Hellgate: London are both good examples of games that comply with the "definition" you provided (and would fit in Patrick's list), while still failing miserably at being RPGs.

Hellgate: London is totally an RPG, I've played it. Edited July 22, 2008 by Cycloneman

[random n00b]

It sure is. (according to your definition)

[Pidesco]

While his offer may be completely valid, he'll come up with a way to invalidate any stab at the challenge. He IS trying to prove a point, after all.

 

I'm also interested to see if it can be done.

 

Eve has a collaborative narrative.

 

Soul Caliber has visible numbers on weapon upgrades, and does have a narrative.

 

Gran Turismo has a lot of visible numbers.

 

Battlefield 2 has a loose narrative, but it is a strictly multiplayer game.

 

You cannot see your weapon damage numbers in quake, but you can get temporary upgrades to your armor and health that are displayed numerically. It also has a narrative.

 

And I'm totally serious about the reward- I'll even see if I can't get someone else to judge so that it's fair.

 

Soul Calibur, Quake and most if not all action games don't have directional stat growth in the same way Final Fantasy or BG have.

 

 

 

I think my definition of an RPG as a game where there is directional, visible stat growth for the player avatar, and where the game has a narrative includes all games in the RPG list, and excludes all games in the second list except for Warcraft 3. However, it could be argued that the units controlled by the player inWarcraft 3 are not player avatars, and as such I'm going to exclude it on that basis.

[SirPetrakus]

From a thread about "what is Obsidian doing to distance AP from ME we went to "I hate ME and OE shouldn't make AP like that". All these acronyms are making me twitch. I'm not gonna discuss what an RPG is. Simply describing the common things the games Patrick listed have isn't a way to do it either. If WoD's idea of an RPG is taking the PnP experience and putting it into shinny graphics I don't think the game is up to that yet, or any game for that matter. You might complain about how linear it is but every game you start to get to the finish line could be blamed for being linear. GTA games, since GTA III at least, allow for the greatest non linearity in games ever, but then again, if I am not mistaken, you didn't like those, you wanted AP to have stat TB combat and dislike the fact that it's an over the shoulder TPS. But there are a great deal of RPGs that have gone for the FP perspective since Might and Magic. I'm not talking about Dark Messiah, but the classic M&M games like The Mandate of Heaven. It was turn based, stats determined combat but you still had to aim at the guy you wanted to shoot, just gave you more time. I don't think you can argue that M&M VI was an RPG and a good one at that, though it lacked the dialogs of latter games. I am still trying to understand not why you hate ME, I think we established that, but what makes you think that OE devs went " Oooh, ME! I like that! Wait a minute, *copy* *paste* let's change the title to AP, voila!" . We haven't seen anything on the game and you are already burning it and sacrificing it to Satan, Vecna or whoever it is you worship. You're like the deranged woman from "The Mist" who preaches about God without any idea or proof of what's going on simply by seeing what you want to see. I bitch about Fallout 3, but I have good reason to, all you need to do it look at a screenshot from 1 or 2 and compare it to 3 and you can plainly see there is something wrong, you see a screenshot of AP and automatically start shouting "Heathens!". aren't you a little quick to judge? You have to play something to truly hate it! You played ME, you disliked it, you feel ripped off. It may seem small but it's part of a trilogy so they need to drag it off a bit, also it's a game targeting XBOX users. Solely XBOX USERS!!! They got an XBOX because they think Maden '09 is the best game ever, a shooter is only good if a beefed up marine in power armor is doing the ass kicking and all other machines, i.e. PCs, are too complex for them to use. They need to stab themselves to find out which end of the knife is the pointy one. I would finally like to apologize for my lack of paragraphs.

[Xard]

[themadhatter114]

I think that if just a few games were added to the list it could have precluded the "level up your guy" definition.

 

Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas would absolutely qualify and it could be argued that the recent NCAA Football and Madden games are, too (especially because of the "Camus Legend" mode on NCAA and the "Superstar" mode on Madden).

 

Are there absolutely no games that are marketed as RPG's but that are completely devoid of skill/attribute increases? Something more like an adventure game, but with perhaps different starting attributed depending on background, a non-linear storyline, multiple endings, and heavy choice & consequences.

 

For instance, if I'm playing Mass Effect with a level 60 character (since it's level-scaled it doesn't at all feel like cheating, and it's way more fun in my opinion), is it no longer an RPG? Or playing any RPG with a maxed out character (which is just boring and game-breaking if there's no level-scaling)?

Edited July 22, 2008 by themadhatter114

[Wrath of Dagon]

SirPetrakis, you've made so many wrong assumptions in your post I don't even know where to start. You'd pretty much have to negate every sentence to arrive at some semblance of the truth. Let me just point out I haven't played a PnP RPG in my life, and I already said an RPG is about player choice, not about combat.

[SirPetrakus]

SirPetrakis, you've made so many wrong assumptions in your post I don't even know where to start. You'd pretty much have to negate every sentence to arrive at some semblance of the truth. Let me just point out I haven't played a PnP RPG in my life, and I already said an RPG is about player choice, not about combat.

 

Is it that you believe the whole game will be short, boring and unimaginative? You haven't even said what you want! You don't want AP turning ME, I got that, I read the reasons too, but why so much hate on the devs, the game and the posters over here? And not just you, the other side is being just as offensive.

 

Obsidian came up with an idea for a game, they utilized it, it was their inspiration. If they had made a poll "We are gonna make a new game, what do you want it to be like?" and every poster said I want what WoD wants and then they answered with "Screw you guys, I'm going home" like Cartman, THEN I would understand. At this point, does it even matter? Would they change the whole game 6 months before release because of one fan as dedicated as he may be? Maybe making a thread about what you would like to see in an Obsidian game get you somewhere later but at this point it's pointless.

 

Personally, I am all for the things that BI stood for and integrated in most of her games, but gamers change, people change, the technology changes, fads change, everything changes. I don't have the patience I had 10 years ago to spend hours upon hours to get through Baldur's Gate 2 length games, nor can I spare that much time. But I'd rather get a game that lasts 15 hours and is consistent *cough Kotor cough* than get a game that is 70 hours long and boring as hell like FF8 was for me.

 

I've been an RPG fan for many years, a dedicated BioWare and BI fan since, I dunno, 10 years maybe? maybe more, I'm a D&D veteran since the 2nd AD&D rules, I'd like to think that with my years of RPG experience I can have a widely acceptable idea of what an RPG is. Oblivion wasn't an RPG, that much is clear, ME might fail as an RPG for you but it was a million times more of an RPG that Oblivion. From what I've read and heard about AP it should be an RPG, even if these qualities are utilized poorly. Just because it isn't your cup of tea, doesn't mean it should be done your way, especially when you aren't the one funding it, it's just too much to ask of anyone.

[c00lizz]

I remember once having a long discussion with someone over wether or not Oblivion was an true RPG, my arguement being that the only way to play a specific "role" would be by directing your skill and stat growth. His couter arguement being that with a little imagination you could play any role you wanted to.

 

It is true in all senses. Now I am not the most avid FPS'er, actually I pretty much hate the genre, but I could easily pick up any of the hundreds of FPS's I've avoided buying over the years and play one whille pretending to roleplay something other than the grizziled ubermarine thats so common these days, and it would be an RPG, for me atleast.

 

In these crossgenre days it's not always easy to tell genres apart though, every game seems to mix in a little of everything in order to improve upon the base they build from. The addition of "RPG elements" in a game can range from being the ability to pick up items, have marginal stat growth or even something as simple as having a multiple choiced convasation.

 

Most people won't agree with you if you go out and proclaim that Prey is a great RPG, but someone probably will. Just as when you go proclaim that Mass Effect isn't a real RPG. In the end it all comes down to what your own criterias for a genre is. Some people want massive stat building or tons of equipment to loot in order for them to call something an RPG. Others are happy if they get to chose an additional weapon every level. Me, I am a bit of a pureist, I think PST was the epitome of cRPG development and everything since that is just varrying degrees of immitation. That doesn't mean I've give up on the genre however, or even that I'll go around and try to change what should be part of an RPG with insults and flames. I'll happily add my input on the subject but in the end, I've come to accept that RPG's isn't as restricted a genre as it used to be. Same as what happend with FPS's, RPG's and every other genre under the sun the developers came to realise that they could borrow ideas from each other and in turn create a more versatile game that, hopefully, will entertain you even more.

 

I am sure if you look hard enough you'll find people that'll argue that Alpha Protocol won't be considered an RPG because it isn't isometric. And for them, thats true. For the rest of us, lets just each make up our own mind and wait and see?

 

Ohh and to answer the original topic, don't you think the Mass Effect forum had a "The KOTOR comparisons must get annoying" topic at one time or another?

Edited July 22, 2008 by c00lizz

[Wrath of Dagon]

Is it that you believe the whole game will be short, boring and unimaginative? You haven't even said what you want! ..., but why so much hate on the devs, the game and the posters over here?

Huh, when did I say or do any of that?