|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Mass Effect - Review @ Boomtown

Default Mass Effect - Review @ Boomtown

December 12th, 2007, 22:38
Originally Posted by Thaurin View Post
It would be very hard to have many shades of grey, I think.
Actually, it's very hard to not have many shades of grey. Because shades of grey is reality, it's how life is, and art is a reflection of life. That's why movies and books have never had much problems with it once you go beyond pre-school writing and the really bad fantasy novels (Wheel of Time, Sword of Truth).

Writing in games really is at a new low if shades of grey are supposed to be "hard".

Originally Posted by BillSeurer View Post
That's a good point. Waaay too many posters here seem to think that the only good games are the specific small list of games that they like and that all other games are bad and anyone who likes a game not on their list (or doesn't like one on their list) is stupid, evil, or whatever. There are a lot of people who like Baldur's Gate 2 and Oblivion and The Witcher and Mass Effect and Planescape Torment and whatever (and all possible subsets thereof).
This is a complaint one sees levelled at the Codex a lot. But the simple fact of the matter is…there aren't many games that do the things Codexers and some Watchers want. That means the argument "you only want this!" becomes a bit peripheral, because it'd be a lot easier to live with the existence of Diablo being called an RPG if on the other hand there was still a strong current of design in favour of Witcher-esque games.

Instead, games are rollderdieboldering down the hill towards the kind of mass appeal and shallow game design that's marked BioWare since day 1 (sorry, I don't like BioWare). There's nothing wrong with BioWare's game, but the funny thing is I could flip your argument upside down and say that right now, BioWare (and Oblivion) is the only RPG design school around. Why would anyone want all games to be like that?

See, you take exception at people arguing for one type of RPG "in theory", but in doing so you missed the fact that those people are arguing against the fact that design is running towards one type of RPG in reality.
Last edited by Brother None; December 12th, 2007 at 23:40.
Brother None is offline

Brother None

Brother None's Avatar
SasqWatch

#21

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,555

Default 

December 12th, 2007, 22:58
The "way too many" post was originally by BillSeurer, actually.

I agree with your point, though—which is what I meant about holding the genre to some sort of standard.

What people resent IMO is being marginalized as not true rpg fans if they happen to have tastes that lead them to enjoy Oblivion or Mass Effect or whatever—when the argument becomes "You are an idiot" instead of "This is the flaw in the game that ruins it for me."

But I for one would certainly not like all games to follow the biowarean template, or any other template—games should stand on their own merits and not just be a reflection of style, nostalgia or hype.

Where there's smoke, there's mirrors.
magerette is offline

magerette

magerette's Avatar
Hedgewitch

#22

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,929

Default 

December 12th, 2007, 23:13
Originally Posted by Brother None View Post
Writing in games really is at a new low if shades of grey are supposed to be "hard".
Yes, one shade. Or two. Or maybe I didn't explain well enough. I guess I meant amount of choices. Shades of grey just means perspectives that aren't that distant from each other. Wildly differing viewpoints that are clearly good and evil aren't necessarily worse or less intelligent in games, in my opinion. But what about endless possibilities?

What I meant was more or better choice than just choosing shade of gray #1 or shade of gray #2, or good or evil. So it has more to do with cause and consequence, really being able to affect the world. Something like that goes counter in a way to the linear progression of a story, making it more of an open-ended affair… but it's rather hard to pull off well.

It's a different sort of game that way and not better or worse. Linear doesn't equal bad.
Thaurin is offline

Thaurin

SasqWatch

#23

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,469

Default 

December 12th, 2007, 23:20
Originally Posted by magerette View Post
The "way too many" post was originally by BillSeurer, actually.
Which is totally out of character and not hard to tell, though.

Originally Posted by magerette View Post
when the argument becomes "You are an idiot" instead of "This is the flaw in the game that ruins it for me."
Well, of course, some diplomacy would help but I didn't see someone calling names…yet.

To be fair, I think Bioware did something "new" in the past by bringing tabletop RPG feel into CRPG world with BG series and NWN franchise.

However, at the same time, I think Bioware (and D&D influence) fixated the image of RPG to mainly generic fantasy/Sci-Fi settings absent of deeper themes. I'm glad to hear the reputation of the Witcher but, personally, I'd like to see CRPG with more intriguing themes even on par with those in novels and films. I guess I am another who is feeling the current major "RPG" trends are going to the opposite direction.
Last edited by Dusk; December 12th, 2007 at 23:26.
Dusk is offline

Dusk

Sentinel

#24

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 278

Default 

December 12th, 2007, 23:54
Originally Posted by Brother None View Post
Actually, it's very hard to not have many shades of grey. Because shades of grey is reality, it's how life is, and art is a reflection of life.
I guess you must sell art or something. Because as far as I can tell, writing is a lot of the problem. Not that it's always so bad, but that there's never much of it. It's simple, flat, basic, flavorless, boring, blah (Oh, no! Maybe it really is an accurate reflection of our lives!).

Originally Posted by Brother None View Post
…those people are arguing against the fact that design is running towards one type of RPG in reality.
Yep. The idea of making cRPG more like RPG is often openly scorned, even at The Codex. Not by everyone, but by most everyone. Some people get hostile about it.

RPG is a collaborative effort. The game has to contribute and enhance what's happening in the player's imagination and not be limited by the constraints of arcade game design. It's a game you play with the game you're playing.

Oh, I wish I had a river I could skate away on. But it don't snow here. It stays pretty green. I'm going to make a lot of money, then I'm going to quit this crazy scene. — [Joni Mitchell]
Squeek is offline

Squeek

Squeek's Avatar
connoisseur of tidbits

#25

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Orange County, California
Posts: 1,807

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 00:20
Originally Posted by fatBastard()
I think it is a bit unfair using the Witcher "choice model" as a comparison when talking about Good vs Evil choices.
I agree.

Originally Posted by skavenhorde
The Witcher is a perfect choice for making a comparison between the usual Good vs Evil choices. Take the first act for example, do you side with the witch who
Please if you could name evil acts she has done? If you can you will be the first.

Originally Posted by skavenhorde
There are no pure good and pure evil choices in life.
Seriously, you must be joking, right?
Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, Hate Crimes, Race Crimes, Gender Crimes, hopefully your joking.

Originally Posted by BillSeurer
posters here seem to think that the only good games are the specific small list of games that they like and that all other games are bad and anyone who likes a game not on their list (or doesn't like one on their list) is stupid, evil, or whatever.
Nicely put.

Originally Posted by Prime Junta
That's precisely it. The evil in The Witcher is understandable, realistic, motivated, and logical — including but not limited to things you have to take a stand on
Example, please?

Edit
I was posting as I read and ran out of space before your example, I will get it in my next post,

Originally Posted by Prime Junta
And that's probably pretty much the reason *why* evil is so lame in most cRPG's: the D&D influence.
I disagree, true evil is not possible in games other than the way they are depicted currently. How can you be true evil and survive in a town, first place no one would talk to you and if you kill everyone then you have no one to control, minuplate and subjugate to your selfish will.
So once again provide some context or preferably a specfic example of an evil scenario, which you think devs should/could/need to use.

Originally Posted by magerette
Gaming boards everywhere are full of elitists, sometimes psychopathically so it seems.
Hey stop making fun of me!

Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language…they're not even real words as much as a succession of violent images.
Last edited by Acleacius; December 13th, 2007 at 00:48.
Acleacius is offline

Acleacius

SasqWatch

#26

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,519

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 01:01
Originally Posted by Thaurin View Post
Exactly! I agree with this. Some people are always rooting for the same kind of RPG and decry any deviation or change in direction that is unleashed. I like many kinds of games. I'd really hate to play only the Temple of Elemental Evils, Plainscape: Torments and The Witchers for the rest of my live. That said, I like evil in games both ways. You can have your realistic, understandable evil if you like, but what about the cliche, mad scientist evil? I like that, too.
I for one don't object to that, at all. My problem is simply that we ONLY get clichéd, mad-scientist, dark-tower, psycho-killer evil — a very, very, VERY few cRPG's excepted.

However, there is something else: I, and I have a pretty strong suspicion that I'm in the majority with this, have a visceral dislike of playing the "psychopathic evil" kind of evil that's on offer in cRPG's. That means that pretty much half the game is wasted on me simply because it turns me off. OTOH I would be *very* interested in playing a "believably evil" character, with understandable motivations and what not.

In other words, I believe that "realistic evil" would not only make for better "art" (which I do believe), but that it would also make for games that are more interesting to a larger number of people.
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#27

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 01:09
I haven't played Mass Effect yet, but I would really have liked if you, as Shepard, could take sides in the conflict. The Renegade options seems to be 'the jack bauer in space' option the two Bioware doctors (ray&greg) talked about earlier. There's no way to side with Saren, as I understand it in Mass Effect? - as of yet. Let's not forget the fact that Bioware are making ME2+3 so hopefully they'll have learned something during the development of ME 1.

Bioware games have from the start been about the story, to put you into a situation in which your character is the main character and you decide how to play the main protagonist in e.g. Jade Empire, the Baldur's Gate series, Kotor or Mass Effect. In BG1+2, no matter what you did, you were saving the world, too….

And Bioware did highly recommend 'the witcher'…
aries100 is offline

aries100

SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team RPGWatch Donor

#28

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark, Europe
Posts: 2,089

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 01:16
Originally Posted by Acleacius View Post
IPlease if you could name evil acts she has done? If you can you will be the first.
(1) She magicked Odo into murdering his brother. (That's what the voodoo doll was for.)

(2) She sold poison to a girl who wanted to commit suicide.

Both of these count as pretty evil to me. Especially point (1) above, but also point (2).

I disagree, true evil is not possible in games other than the way they are depicted currently. How can you be true evil and survive in a town, first place no one would talk to you and if you kill everyone then you have no one to control, minuplate and subjugate to your selfish will.
That's my point exactly — what you're talking about is not "true" evil — it's unrealistic, non-believable, stupid, clichéd, moronic evil.

So once again provide some context or preferably a specfic example of an evil scenario, which you think devs should/could/need to use.
Oh, come on, Acleacius — surely you can think of some stuff yourself. I can think of a half-dozen scenarios off the top of my head; starting from the one I described above. Just read a few books, watch a few movies, see a few plays and you'll get any amount of inspiration.

No, I won't write outlines here, because it'd be about a page per outline and I don't feel like doing the work just to prove a point.
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#29

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 01:23
Originally Posted by BillSeurer View Post
Playing devil's advocate here, so everything hinges on one choice between two options made in one conversation in The Witcher. How is that so believable?
There's nothing inherently unbelievable in binary choices, three choices, an infinity of choices, or even in no choices at all. The believability or lack thereof depends on what the choices are.

As in:

"You just saw a clearly hungry, slightly crazy-looking character grab a loaf of bread from a store and run off. What do you do?"

(a) Alert the shopkeeper
(b) Distract the shopkeeper so the poor sod gets away
(c) Attempt to tackle the thief
(d) Yell "Police!"
(e) Piss on the floor, punch the shopkeeper in the mouth, stomp on a passing kitten, go "MUHAHAHAHA!" and then kill everybody.
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#30

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 01:25
Originally Posted by txa1265
Actually, the choices you make in Hammer & Sickle
Damn that was a fun game, but frustrating at times.

Originally Posted by Dusk
Basically, they are using the same formula with rather superficial changes
Sadly I bet they feel there is no reason to change this, since they keep making money.

Originally Posted by Prime Junta
In other words, he's unquestionably evil, but for good or at least believable reasons.
This maybe true to some degree, but you still have a very boring and unrealistic RPG, unless you entertained by playing someone whom destroys, rapes and slaughters villagers. As I said before it's really impossible to do because either none will talk to you or you have to kill everyone. You may consider this high art game design however, I will bet your in the minority. Nor do I believe your example is "for good or at least believable reasons" for RPing. It would be like making a Vampire game with a character who's Humanity is about 20, they could never do anything but dominate or murder others. Like I said if you enjoy this, fine but don't think it's a good idea to encourage game developers they have to be much more responsible with budgets, than to appeal to the smallest minority of gamers. Diversity is great but making a game for 5% of gamers that like to play evil?

Originally Posted by magerette
when the argument becomes "You are an idiot" instead of "This is the flaw in the game that ruins it for me."
That's true and wrong when it's done.
I have seen the opposite also, very often you have people trying to call oblivion an RPG, which in most cases it's not. Since if RP is what oblivion is then almost any game is a RPG, which would be very sad. I am not saying there are exceptions or specific definitions and maybe it's just me but I can't see past the "If I am RP, I should have some ability to affect the world/story".
Yet many younger gamers may never know what real RPG is since many of these Action games's PR departments intentionally lie to make sales.

Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language…they're not even real words as much as a succession of violent images.
Acleacius is offline

Acleacius

SasqWatch

#31

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,519

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 01:41
Originally Posted by Prime Junta
(1) She magicked Odo into murdering his brother. (That's what the voodoo doll was for.)
Did you story have anything in it showing this or is this just your best guess/opinion, as I have tried playing that several times with different dialog options (i.e. the different English options long, short and final) and found nothing?

(2) She sold poison to a girl who wanted to commit suicide.
Once again did you get any story or dialog saying the girl told her why she was buying it?

Both of these count as pretty evil to me. Especially point (1) above, but also point (2).
I hope I am not missing something though at this point, afaik we are just dealing with imagined evidence, since I haven't seen any of this as in story proof.

No, I won't write outlines here, because it'd be about a page per outline and I don't feel like doing the work just to prove a point.
Ok, no problem but your incorrect at least about me, I sure the hell can't think of one and a book is different as is a movie, we are seeing depictions of characters not trying to RP one, afai can tell atm.

Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language…they're not even real words as much as a succession of violent images.
Acleacius is offline

Acleacius

SasqWatch

#32

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,519

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 01:41
Originally Posted by Acleacius View Post
This maybe true to some degree, but you still have a very boring and unrealistic RPG, unless you entertained by playing someone whom destroys, rapes and slaughters villagers.
By "unrealistic," are you saying that the Romans (or people like them, before and since) haven't actually done those sorts of things? If so, you're incredibly naive — it's going on right now in many places in the world.

Second, my point appears to have whizzed right over your head. Specifically, in most games, there's precisely nothing to rape, murder, and arson beyond "because I'm eeeeevil, muhahahaha," whereas I'm looking for realistic, believable motivation that would allow me as the player to identify with the (evil) character I'm playing — that being the whole point of role-playing.

In other words: evil people aren't evil because they're evil. They're evil for any number of reasons that make perfect sense to them: they were abused as kids, they're racists, they're patriots, they're loyal to a nasty organization and "just obey orders," their greed or ambition gets the better of their compassion, they're on a mission from God, they're out to save the world, they've suffered a horrible wrong and are out to get revenge, they feel lost and powerless and want to lash back, and so on. There's certainly no shortage of believable, understandable examples and models to pick from: the only reason RPG's are stuck in Skeletor-mode is… because they're stuck in Skeletor-mode. Or because people know no better.

As I said before it's really impossible to do because either none will talk to you or you have to kill everyone.
Empirically not true. Tactics like that *work* — it will scare a large number of people into collaborating with you.

You may consider this high art game design however, I will bet your in the minority. Nor do I believe your example is "for good or at least believable reasons" for RPing.
So, do you believe that the evil choices in, say, Jade Empire, NWN, or KOTOR are "for good or at least believable reasons?" If so, I'd like to hear your explanation as to why these reasons are better or more believable than reasons that actually, in real life, motivate real, basically normal, basically good people to do horrible things.

It would be like making a Vampire game with a character who's Humanity is about 20, they could never do anything but dominate or murder others. Like I said if you enjoy this, fine but don't think it's a good idea to encourage game developers they have to be much more responsible with budgets, than to appeal to the smallest minority of gamers. Diversity is great but making a game for 5% of gamers that like to play evil?
Acleacius, you just re-stated my exact beef with games like NWN, KOTOR, Jade Empire, and even MotB: the evil on offer is precisely the mindless, unmotivated, pointless evil that only appeals to the 5% of players who genuinely enjoy evil for its own sake.

Oh, and one more thing that I failed to mention: I'm not even necessarily calling for *player choices* that are evil in this way. I'd be thrilled pink if the *antagonist* was evil in a believable way. Say, *you* were playing the part of an Egyptian villager suffering under the Roman yoke, and the boss you were fighting was the provincial governor I described earlier. Something like The Witcher, in fact — it's one of the rare games where the end boss's motives *made sense* psychologically.
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#33

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 01:58
Originally Posted by Acleacius View Post
Did you story have anything in it showing this or is this just your best guess/opinion, as I have tried playing that several times with different dialog options (i.e. the different English options long, short and final) and found nothing?
Yes, it was as good as explicitly stated in the big dialog scene before the Act I boss battle.

Once again did you get any story or dialog saying the girl told her why she was buying it?
Yes. You could talk to Abigail and get her to explain herself. She basically shrugged it off as "everyone makes their choices; I just sold her what she wanted to buy."


I hope I am not missing something though at this point, afaik we are just dealing with imagined evidence, since I haven't seen any of this as in story proof.
Yes, you do appear to have missed it.

The Witcher is a somewhat subtle game. It implies and suggests a great deal where other games would draw you a picture with a big caption on it. You have to pay attention to figure it out; it doesn't force itself down your throat.

Ok, no problem but your incorrect at least about me, I sure the hell can't think of one and a book is different as is a movie, we are seeing depictions of characters not trying to RP one, afai can tell atm.
OK, then. How about:

(1) Playing as one of the Skywalkers, only with the option to choose differently. Anakin fell for some pretty good reasons (made clearer in the books, btw, than the st00pid Episodes 1-3). Luke could have fallen for equally good reasons, e.g. when tempted by the Emperor. What would have happened then?

(2) Playing as Cheradenine Zakalwe from Iain M. Banks's Use of Weapons. How far will you go in order to win your war? As far as Cheradenine, who once did something so horrible it plagued his nightmares for the rest of his life?

(3) Playing as Túrin Turambar from Tolkien's Narn i Hîn Húrin.

(4) Playing as a knight of the First Crusade under Raymond of Toulouse.

(5) Playing as a samurai of the Shogun period, caught between duty, conscience, and love.

(6) Playing as an aspiring priest of Mictlantecuchtli in pre-Columbian Mexico.
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#34

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 10:44
Originally Posted by Prime Junta
By "unrealistic," are you saying that the Romans (or people like them, before and since) haven't actually done those sorts of things? If so, you're incredibly naive
No, I simply mean they not understandable acts of evil at the time, as they had no way really of knowing they were being brainwashed nor did they refer to it as murder or rape, actually irrc they consider it a holy mission. Committing evil acts as a RP or in RL even would require you knowing they are evil acts which you are perpetrating. While say the leaders might certainly be, but your example was of your RP character I referred to, hell it's even possible some of the leaders are duped into doing evil things they think or holy. Anyone remember the original names for the war in Irag? Crusade and Infinite Justice they sort of sound holy don't they, wonder why those didn't go over to well.
Second, my point appears to have whizzed right over your head. Specifically, in most games, there's precisely nothing to rape, murder, and arson beyond "because I'm eeeeevil, muhahahaha,"
Maybe it did, all I saying is even if those were available it still wouldn't work as a game, even if you were able to do things in P&P game I can't see going anywhere, so if that what you mean, then I guess it did whizzed pasted me.

In other words: evil people aren't evil because they're evil. They're evil for any number of reasons that make perfect sense to them: they were abused as kids
I agree and that's very well said and while true it's not game material, book or movie sure.

Empirically not true. Tactics like that *work* — it will scare a large number of people into collaborating with you.
I empirically, disagree it works only as an NPC at least at the moment and the idea as I have mentioned before that you seem to think a developer should spend a vast amount of remorses it would take while only satisfying maybe 5% of the gaming community seems far fetched atm. Who knows though with the corporatists running the show and feeding off the military complex as General Ike warned, that 5% could boom and people could treat rampant violence against innocent men, women and childern as a sporting event. Oh wait Shock and Awe war coverage, hell you maybe in luck there could be a game in the works, NOW!

I'd be thrilled pink if the *antagonist* was evil in a believable way
Damn that's a good idea.

Yes, it was as good as explicitly stated in the big dialog scene before the Act I boss battle.
Like I said I never got that, only Odo falsely trying to blame her, which is exactly what he was doing, blaming someone else for his own act, he even states in his own words "he hated warriors" unless your not giving him credit for anything he says and beleive everything is something she is making him do and say. I feel very comfortable seeing him as a phony if you wish to believe she did this much less had the ability to, that fine but it very far from certain.
A perfect example of this is, if she was really using the doll for this purpose why is she still praying at the doll, maybe it's a representation of one of her demi-gods, Geralt only comments it looked similar.
Additionally why did she have a motive to do this to Odo, just cause?
Lol, all I can say is I hope if you ever get called to jury duty and someones life is on the line your a little more particular about evidence of putting someone to death.
Remember it wasn't about her life OR all the others, it was only was there evidence to kill her, they chose to attack Geralt.
Yes. You could talk to Abigail and get her to explain herself. She basically shrugged it off as "everyone makes their choices; I just sold her what she wanted to buy."
Ok, I will recheck, I sure didn't get that dialog.

Yes, you do appear to have missed it.
Hehe, well even if Abby did sell it knowing, that she was going to kill herself, it would be another very contrived quest plot as clearly Abby's character was not that way, she Clearly would have enlisted her help and had an ally to repay the bastards that were devastating the women in the village, at least from what little I understand about women.
I really like The Witcher but to choose to ignore several places where they intentionally contrive situations to prevent a good or positive outcome would be disingenuous, at least for me.
The Witcher is a somewhat subtle game.
Subtle is not how I would choose to describe it, actually it's pretty in your face about a lot of things, imo, They seemed to have felt their design choice of less evils was too absolute to break, so when it wasn't possible padding was added, which I personally regret they felt they had to stick to this impossible standard and weakened parts of the game for it.

I'll have to get the last one later or in the next post.

Trust me, most of the names I have been called you can't translate in any language…they're not even real words as much as a succession of violent images.
Acleacius is offline

Acleacius

SasqWatch

#35

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,519

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 11:04
Originally Posted by Acleacius View Post
No, I simply mean they not understandable acts of evil at the time, as they had no way really of knowing they were being brainwashed nor did they refer to it as murder or rape, actually irrc they consider it a holy mission. Committing evil acts as a RP or in RL even would require you knowing they are evil acts which you are perpetrating.
By that definition, evil would be as good as non-existent. I'm sure the guy operating the gas chamber at Auschwitz-Birkenau had it all clear in his head that gassing Jews, gays, Communists, and Romany doesn't count as murder… even if he might woken up screaming in the night on occasion (chalk that up to weakness of character).

The whole point of the kind of evil I'm after in games is that it is understandable and motivated. People are really good at rationalizing things to themselves, whether it's genocide or just a little white lie. That does not make the act any less evil — it just means that whoever did it succeeded at lying to himself about it.

I empirically, disagree it works only as an NPC at least at the moment and the idea as I have mentioned before that you seem to think a developer should spend a vast amount of remorses it would take while only satisfying maybe 5% of the gaming community seems far fetched atm.
No, Acleacius.

I really don't seem to be getting through to you, am I?

What I'm asking is that the developers take the resources they now put into writing boring, clichéd, stupid, strangle-passing-kittens-muhahaha evil, and write believable, psychologically motivated, understandable evil instead.

I don't want more evil. I want better evil.
Prime Junta is offline

Prime Junta

RPGCodex' Little BRO

#36

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 8,540

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 11:31
Originally Posted by Acleacius View Post
Seriously, you must be joking, right?
Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, Hate Crimes, Race Crimes, Gender Crimes, hopefully your joking.
Nope, I agree with skavenhorde. All these… acts are equally performed from a certain perspective. Your and most of society's perspective of it is that they are vile, wrong and evil. However, there is no universal truth that they are inherently evil. These acts just are what they are. Good and evil are labels given to them by man.

A good example of this to me is slavery. Most people nowadays would say slavery is evil. However, a long time ago (and not so long ago) it was perfectly acceptable to keep slaves and was even regulated by law. These people did not think it was evil. Only today people would call it so, and even go as far as to call the ancient society that practiced slavery evil.

I like this as an argument in discussions with Christians, as rules for the handling of slaves came directly from God, according to the bible. If this isn't proof to them that there is no such thing as absolute truth, then I don't know what is.
Last edited by Thaurin; December 13th, 2007 at 11:39.
Thaurin is offline

Thaurin

SasqWatch

#37

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,469

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 11:53
Originally Posted by aries100 View Post
I haven't played Mass Effect yet, but I would really have liked if you, as Shepard, could take sides in the conflict. The Renegade options seems to be 'the jack bauer in space' option the two Bioware doctors (ray&greg) talked about earlier. There's no way to side with Saren, as I understand it in Mass Effect? - as of yet.
Oh, hell yeah. That would be fantastic. I haven't finished the game yet, but I'm sure it's not possible. However, Saren is an interesting character. I guess it's probably because of the prequel book Revelation that I read. He's a bit cliched to be sure, but the cold, mechanical efficiency with which he works is contagious, even though it looks like he's only doing what he's doing because he wants power. Siding with this "evil" side would be very interesting.
Thaurin is offline

Thaurin

SasqWatch

#38

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,469

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 12:17
Originally Posted by Acleacius View Post
I have seen the opposite also, very often you have people trying to call oblivion an RPG, which in most cases it's not. […] …many of these Action games's PR departments intentionally lie to make sales.
Lie? No, Oblivion actually is an RPG. This is exactly the elitism that was spoken about. Oblivion: doing quests? check. Leveling up a character? check. Looting? check. Exploration? check? Dialogue? check. Whether these elements have been executed to your satisfaction is an entirely different matter.

This boils down to whether it's useful to think in genres, anyway. When is something a RPG? Does it matter? Even within what you'd call "true RPG's" the differences can be so vast that you'd love one game on the one hand and despise another on the other (with scores of people seeing it the other way round).

"Affecting the world/story" or having "depth" to gameplay isn't what defines a role-playing game, to me anyway. Maybe that's because, you know, sometimes I just want to play an RPG where I don't affect the world/story or have "deep" gameplay.
Thaurin is offline

Thaurin

SasqWatch

#39

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,469

Default 

December 13th, 2007, 12:39
I've got an impression that the majority of Bioware game players don't read fictions outside of fantasy and Sci-Fi genres. For, otherwise, it cannot be so difficult to see Bioware story-telling scheme lacks many aspects compared with other materials for story-telling.

Fantasy world settings tend to lack the aspect of convincing economy and politics as well as characters inside them. The Witcher tackled with this tendency and seems to be widely accepted as a success in this respect. I wonder if this is revolutionary as the designers claim but I think it managed to bring back a part of people who feel they are too old to play RPGs. However, I think that there are still many more rooms where other means of story-telling will find their places to enrich role-playing experience in CRPGs.

Originally Posted by Acleacius View Post
Sadly I bet they feel there is no reason to change this, since they keep making money.
I wonder if game industry is being assimilated by an economic system which reminds me of Hollywood movie industry. After seeking for immediate profits and forgetting about maturing the content,Hollywood is rather staggering. At least, the part of game industry may be following a more or less similar path.
Dusk is offline

Dusk

Sentinel

#40

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 278
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Mass Effect - Review @ Boomtown
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:41.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch