Mass Effect 2 - Review Flood #2

I think ME2 and Torchlight are an interesting comparison. The two games have almost nothing in common. If stats, loot, and a robust charater system are what make a great RPG, then Torchlight is the RPG, and ME2 is not. If role playing, characters, dialouge and story make an RPG, then ME2 is a great RPG and Torchlight is not.

Based on my limited play, it seems to me that you're given plenty of scope to role play your character. ME2 is basically the role playing elements of an RPG combined with the gameplay of a third person cover shooter.

JemyM said:

How about No One Lives Forever 2?

Click to expand...

Heck, you even get dialog choices that change some minor things in NOLF 2 ... what a wonderful game!

Badesumofu said:

I think ME2 and Torchlight are an interesting comparison. The two games have almost nothing in common.

Click to expand...

I thought my point was clear - neither game was trying to be the 'everything-RPG', but rather accomplish a narrow set of goals, and each doggedly works at accomplishing those goals even if it means that some sets of fans will rant about what they DIDN'T do. And I think each game does a great job of meeting ITS OWN goals.

txa1265 said:

Heck, you even get dialog choices that change some minor things in NOLF 2 … what a wonderful game!



I thought my point was clear - neither game was trying to be the 'everything-RPG', but rather accomplish a narrow set of goals, and each doggedly works at accomplishing those goals even if it means that some sets of fans will rant about what they DIDN'T do. And I think each game does a great job of meeting ITS OWN goals.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Its a good game that accomplished what it set out to do very well. That's fine, some people will love it, others won't. I just feely strongly that there is nothing truly rpg about this. As I have said before, gameplay and character progression wise it is not really any different from many action/shooter games that have come out recently on console. But these games, many of which have arguably more robust character advancement, don't even pretend to call themselves rpgs (e.g., Infamous)

And, once again IMHO, the ability to choose between two different dialogue choices throughout the game doesn't make this roleplaying. All this effects is dialogue and a few cutscenes. Once these are over, you go back to exactly the same linear route and gameplay; nothing truly changes.

So no character progression that requires meaningful choices that materially affect playstyle or gameplay (with exception of initial class selection). No roleplaying that materially affects gameplay. IMO that's not a rpg. Hell, the aforementioned infamous probably had as much character progression and the choices you made actually affected powers and gameplay to a much more noticeable extent.

I feel pretty strongly about this, and I don't think I am one of those crusty old rpg fanatics that won't accept anything new. I strongly enjoyed and supported Fallout 3, didn't really understand a lot of the DA complaints. I also play a much wider range of games than I'm used and am accepting of the reality and some of the positives of consoles. However, this is not a game I can support as an rpg. It should be marketed almost wholly as 3rd person sci-fi cover shooter.

Still a good game, just not what is advertised. I have no problem with rpg-lite games and games with minor rpg elements, but when they start to be considered the cutting edge of rpg and the model going forward, I get very concerned.

I agree with dagoo7, you can't say that story elements and dialogue options are what makes an RPG because most games have stories, and "roleplaying choices" are often available as well. Would you call Star Craft an RPG because it has a story? Would you call Thief series an RPG because every time you met a guard you had the choice to kill him with a bow, a sword/dagger or knock him out with a club or just sneak by him? Would you call Indigo Prophecy an RPG because it had many dialogue choices, some of which changed what would happen in the game further on?

Yes you can have RPG hybrids with other genres, for example the HoMM series had level ups and even inventories for heroes, but the gameplay always made it clear: you were playing a Turn Based Strategy game. The RPG elements were an afterthought. Here in ME2 we see even less RPG elements then in HoMM and the gameplay is making it clear once again: its a third person shooter. So for reviewers come in and say that this is the pinnacle of what an RPG can be... well it's just blasphemy dammit.

Those are not actual choices that impact the story or world, however. All games I've played that had such choices to the degree Mass Effect does, have been RPGs. To me, an RPG is basically just an adventure game with choices and consequences, hence the term "roleplaying game" - it offers a world and a way for the player to properly interact with the world, making it a roleplaying experience. If that interaction lacks - i.e you are not able to affect the world, it's an adventure game, action game, strategy game, etc. Doesn't mean it's a bad game, but it's not an RPG.

Maylander said:

Those are not actual choices that impact the story or world, however. All games I've played that had such choices to the degree Mass Effect does, have been RPGs. To me, an RPG is basically just an adventure game with choices and consequences, hence the term "roleplaying game" - it offers a world and a way for the player to properly interact with the world, making it a roleplaying experience. If that interaction lacks - i.e you are not able to affect the world, it's an adventure game, action game, strategy game, etc. Doesn't mean it's a bad game, but it's not an RPG.

Click to expand...

I get what you are saying, but that is incredibly reductive. By that logic, any interactive movie (i.e., most games) are rpgs. I frankly don't agree. An adventure game is an adventure game not an rpg. An rpg requires meaningful choices and different ways to play.

And once again, the "choices" and "consequences" in ME2 do not materially affect or influence gameplay. Outside dialogue and few cutscenes which do not affect any other part of the game, you are playing the exact same game in the exact same way (with exception of initial class choice). That might mean you get to see a slightly different movie, but it is still just an interactive movie or adventure game with shooter elements, but it by no means anything equivalent to what an rpg is supposed to be.

Interestingly, there are always several groups :

- those whobelieve that rules constitute an RPG
- those who believe that a role constitutes an RPG
- those who believe that stats constitute an RPG

etc. . These groups constantly clash over the question "what constitutes an RPG ?"

Alrik Fassbauer said:

Interestingly, there are always several groups :

- those whobelieve that rules constitute an RPG
- those who believe that a role constitutes an RPG
- those who believe that stats constitute an RPG

etc. . These groups constantly clash over the question "what constitutes an RPG ?"

Click to expand...

Agreed. But what I am arguing is that it fails to satisfy any single one of the common defintions/camps of rpg. I don't subscribe to any particular one and am generally very inclusive. But this game by any existing definition cannot be called an rpg.

Obviously the meaning of a word is only what people attribute to it. So if the meaning of rpg changes, I guess we won't get to see anymore. A very sad thing IMO.

Suffice to say, many folks disagree with your narrow definition.

Maylander said:

Those are not actual choices that impact the story or world, however. All games I've played that had such choices to the degree Mass Effect does, have been RPGs.

Click to expand...

On the contrary saying different things or doing different in the Indigo Prophecy would cause things to change. Hide a piece of evidence with one character, and later on it might be easier to fool a policeman that comes by your house, don't hide it and you might need to do a tough minigame to fight off that policeman when he spots the evidence. Say the wrong thing in conversation and people become suspicious or your morale takes a hit. It was all about choices and consequences but there were absolutely no stats or the improvement of thereof. I don't believe that that game is an RPG because its genre is called an "interactive movie". And if you move over the definition of an RPG to fit that genre instead, then what do you call games like Titan Quest, Might and Magic series, Icewind Dale, Temple of Elemental Evil, etc?

txa1265 said:

Suffice to say, many folks disagree with your narrow definition.

Click to expand...

Reread my posts, It's hardly a narrow definition. If we want to completely abandon any concept of any of the traditional parameters and definitions or camps of what of an rpg is, that's fine I guess. Just surprising that this basically seems to be accepted opinion now, even on an rpg site.

Could someone explain in what sense this is an rpg in refutation of earlier arguments. Were getting to the point that basically any action or adventure game can be called an rpg, even if they make no claims of being so.

Sorry just don't get it.

Once again its ok to like a good game regardless of whether its an rpg or not. Simply saying that its not an rpg doesn't mean it can't be a great game. I am not blaming anyone that likes this. I am enjoying it quite much, but its frankly not that very different really from Infamous or hell even Uncharted. I just haven't heard anybody make a true defense or explanation of how this is an rpg. Or have we basically all agreed at this point that any interactive movie with some form of combat or gameplay and basic power upgrades is an rpg.

So…dagoo is system shock 2 an rpg? Or final fantasy(or any other jrpg).

This whole craze about what is and isn't an rpg is really silly. We argue about what should and shouldn't be included with some bizare list of what makes it an rpg. Its totally not even needed.

rune_74 said:

So…dagoo is system shock 2 an rpg? Or final fantasy(or any other jrpg)

Click to expand...

From my perspective, System Shock 2 (one of my all time favorites) satisfied at least one definition/concept of an rpg in character progression and playstyle choice. You had to make meaningful decisions about how to advance your character. Game was very different depending on your build. That's why I said before that Deus Ex was in some ways more of an rpg. But I guess I will just shutup because apparently I am in the wrong around here.

All that I can tell you is that when I am playing ME2 I cannot fool myself that I am playing an rpg. Does not feel like one at all. Maybe its because I have been trying out a lot of AAA console non-rpg games, and I just don't see that much difference really.

Edit: To your second and recently added point. I felt the same way about alot of these arguments when Fallout 3 came out and everyone was complaining, and I argued pretty strongly in defense of it and the overly staid and angry criticisms of the game in relation to the original. Here though I am not seeing it or feeling it.

And I think it does matter when something is marketing itself as an rpg as one used to be able to expect certain basic characteristics. I am not criticizing the game, its quality, or its ability to be enjoyed, just expressing my thoughts about game trends and experiences in relation to rpgs and games in general. Unfortunately, I've found myself feeling the need to defend myself against what I felt as misunderstanding and/or summary dismissal of my points. Obviously, this was a bad idea. Just thought it would be an interesting discussion on an rpg site, but apparently not.

Edit Part II: As I look back, I remember that you and I were on the same side in several Fallout 3 threads in response to some rather irrational complaints about that game. So if I am pissing you off, I really have gotten off track. My intent was not to be dogmatic or critical of the game, but I guess I may be getting there in self defense.

The System Shock games were absolutely RPGs imo. They were hybrids of course, like Deus Ex, which I also consider an RPG.

dagoo7 said:

Edit Part II: As I look back, I remember that you and I were on the same side in several Fallout 3 threads in response to some rather irrational complaints about that game. So if I am pissing you off, I really have gotten off track. My intent was not to be dogmatic or critical of the game, but I guess I may be getting there in self defense.

Click to expand...

Heh, no your not pissing me off

I am just jaded I guess in the whol is it or is it not an rpg....and alot of people think they have to tell you it is or isn't and tell you why you are wrong....just play the game and have fun....this is just a different type of rpg(if you must have a title) then you are used to.

txa1265 said:

I thought my point was clear - neither game was trying to be the 'everything-RPG', but rather accomplish a narrow set of goals, and each doggedly works at accomplishing those goals even if it means that some sets of fans will rant about what they DIDN'T do. And I think each game does a great job of meeting ITS OWN goals.

Click to expand...

Precisely.

Any definition of RPG that excludes ME2 is pretty weak definition. The game has a character system, role playing choices, plenty of scope to define your own Sheppard within the bounds of a flexible narrative. It might not be the kind of RPG some people here prefer, but to discount it from being an RPG altogether is just silliness.

Just because role playing has tended to go with robust character and loot systems in the past doesn't meant that those elements can't be seperated. Unless you want to try to construct an argument that says that it's impossible to role play without stats and loot, I don't see how ME2 can be discounted.

dagoo7 said:

Reread my posts, It's hardly a narrow definition. If we want to completely abandon any concept of any of the traditional parameters and definitions or camps of what of an rpg is, that's fine I guess. Just surprising that this basically seems to be accepted opinion now, even on an rpg site.

Could someone explain in what sense this is an rpg in refutation of earlier arguments. Were getting to the point that basically any action or adventure game can be called an rpg, even if they make no claims of being so.

Sorry just don't get it.

Once again its ok to like a good game regardless of whether its an rpg or not. Simply saying that its not an rpg doesn't mean it can't be a great game. I am not blaming anyone that likes this. I am enjoying it quite much, but its frankly not that very different really from Infamous or hell even Uncharted. I just haven't heard anybody make a true defense or explanation of how this is an rpg. Or have we basically all agreed at this point that any interactive movie with some form of combat or gameplay and basic power upgrades is an rpg.

Click to expand...

Choices and consequences, ownership of character.

Badesumofu said:

Choices and consequences, ownership of character.

Click to expand...

Did you read my earlier posts, I explained my position on both of those. You may not agree but just by stating those does not mean I was ignoring those things. Let's just agree to disagree. I see it as largely the illusion of choice and very limited meaningful variability, you see it as roleplaying and more robust than I. That's fine. And frankly not a big friggin' deal. I apologize for trying to express my opinion. Never should have tried to explain myself.

dagoo7 said:

I apologize for trying to express my opinion. Never should have tried to explain myself.

Click to expand...

Hey, don't get upset, expressing opinions and such is why we are all here. We have different thoughts and perspectives ... that is just life.