"11 Amazing Minutes Of Mass Effect 3 Footage"

Hm, I never really cared about labels (in this case, genres - I do care about labels in clothes ) ). I like the games I like, no matter what they've been marketed as.
I'm looking forward to Mass Effect 3. Yes, I do, though I don't care about co op/MP ... stopped MPing back in 2004 and left it there. Well, thinking about it, I'm primarily looking forward to meeting my male Shep again. And, of course, Garrus .

I still don't understand what people saw in SS2, however - it was a fun game back in the days, but for me it failed to capture the atmosphere of SS1, with the exception of that memorial dungeon near the end. Besides, it happened to be sandwiched between Thief 1 and 2, both games I enjoyed greatly ... more so than most other games of that period, SS2 included. Had SS2 got rid of those Annelids and organic stuff, I might have liked it better - that was so much like the dungeons of Thief 1, a bit distracting from the overall experience.

I don't personally care if the ME series is an RPG or not. Its so chock full of epic ass kicking greatness. I loved ME2.

For me Mass Effect is one of the greatest gaming experiences I've had in my 20+ years of RPG gaming. Granted the RPG aspect is not as complex as it is in some other games, but I consider it an RPG/adventure hybrid. And it had enough of RPG elements to give the impression of choices that affects both the character and the world.

In terms of story, character, dialogue and world-building it's easily one of the greatest games I've ever played. The universe was remarkable well thought-out, drawing more from scifi literature than scifi movies. The characters felt very real, which is a really hard thing to pull off in a game. And the story was very emotionally involving, full of intrigue and excitement. The dialogue was often very witty and even very funny.

It even had a romance that I genuinely believed in, because the writing and the acting of the voice actors and the computer models was so convincing.

When people talk about games that would make for good movies, I usually disagree with them rather strongly. Most games, even great ones, even the ones that are praised for their writing, would make for pretty poor movies.

But Mass Effect could be turned into an awesome movie, because the writing is way beyond what games usually offer.

Unfortunately ME2 was much more episodic in its story. The main quest felt more like a collection of sidequests than a cohesive overall story with building momentum. It never grabbed me the way ME did, even if some of the side-stories and the characters they centered on were interesting. The structural choice to concentrate so much on hiring your crew was not a good one, IMHO. It seemed to make up the main bulk of the game, and felt repetitive.

I'm hoping that ME3 delivers a main quest equal to the first game, but also offers a bit more of an open world experience where you can travel to random locations and enjoy adventures unrelated to the main quest.

This post is one of the many examples why I often tend to believe there are completely different generations of gamers.

It's almost to me as if there were parallel societies of gamers somewhere.

Alrik Fassbauer said:

This post is one of the many examples why I often tend to believe there are completely different generations of gamers.

It's almost to me as if there were parallel societies of gamers somewhere.

Click to expand...

I assume you are referring to my post?

You could be right, maybe the younger generations have different opinions than I do. I started playing RPG's back in the late 80's, with titles like Ultima V, Dungeon Master and Pool Of Radiance. Before that I was of course already familiar with traditional D&D and AD&D games.

But then again, it seems to me that the youngsters also like Mass Effect.

tuukka said:

Unfortunately ME2 was much more episodic in its story. The main quest felt more like a collection of sidequests than a cohesive overall story with building momentum. It never grabbed me the way ME did, even if some of the side-stories and the characters they centered on were interesting. The structural choice to concentrate so much on hiring your crew was not a good one, IMHO. It seemed to make up the main bulk of the game, and felt repetitive.
.

Click to expand...

See I really liked the episodic nature of ME2. I thought that the pacing of all the individual stories was amazing, with just the right mix of story, action and dialog. It reminded me of watching say a season of star trek, where there were lots of individual stories but still a common thread tieing everything together. I wouldn't want every game to be like that, but it was still a great change of pace.

I think part of it was that most games have one big story but that story has to fill up 20+ hours of game time. As a result they have to put in lots of things designed to stretch out that story, like giant 4 hour dungeons that you have to complete before the story continues. The episodic nature of ME2 allowed them to get around this by having more actual story and less filler.

fadedc said:

See I really liked the episodic nature of ME2. I thought that the pacing of all the individual stories was amazing, with just the right mix of story, action and dialog.

Click to expand...

Ditto. I really didn't like the first game. Sure, it had amazing presentation and that's what kept me playing, but pacing felt off. It also felt like an experimental game - combat, skill system, environments just didn't feel right to me.

Got ME2 for X-mas and that's the only reason I bothered to play ME to the end. I didn't care much for ME but ME2 is one of the most entertaining and highly polished games I've ever played. The missions were all interesting and fun, nevermind that they were a bit repetetive.

The episodic nature meant I could knock off a mission in an hour or so, be completely satisfied and if I could not play for a couple of days or weeks it didn't matter because I could easily slip right back into the game. The individual NPC quests were all engaging and a much more interesting way to get backstory in than having episodic conversations. And the tighter combat along with refinement of the hacking and mining systems just made the game a pleasure to play instead of a chore.

They also did an amazing job with the variety of environments and locations compared to the first game.

Alrik Fassbauer said:

This post is one of the many examples why I often tend to believe there are completely different generations of gamers.

It's almost to me as if there were parallel societies of gamers somewhere.

Click to expand...

Boy isn't that an interesting take? I have been playing rpg's now for 25 years and I like Mass effect, and yep it's a role playing game...you make choices throughout, it's not just a shooter...and low and behold it's made in north america. Many here consider stalker an rpg...but not mass effect? You have dilagoue choices, you do quests...and story progresses, there are stats....I mean, because it has shooting elements(that you can pause) it's not an rpg now? HOw silly is this gonna get?

Alrik Fassbauer said:

This post is one of the many examples why I often tend to believe there are completely different generations of gamers.

It's almost to me as if there were parallel societies of gamers somewhere.

Click to expand...

Or old gamers that are open minded? I can play a Spiderweb game and Mass Effect and enjoy both.

Alrik Fassbauer said:

This post is one of the many examples why I often tend to believe there are completely different generations of gamers.

It's almost to me as if there were parallel societies of gamers somewhere.

Click to expand...

I think you exaggerate greatly. Mass Effect 2 might not be a good RPG, but it was a very good and enjoyable game. It was definitely one of my favorite games of the last years and the Bioware game I enjoyed most since Baldur's Gate titles.

rune_74 said:

Boy isn't that an interesting take? I have been playing rpg's now for 25 years and I like Mass effect, and yep it's a role playing game…you make choices throughout, it's not just a shooter…and low and behold it's made in north america. Many here consider stalker an rpg…but not mass effect? You have dilagoue choices, you do quests…and story progresses, there are stats….I mean, because it has shooting elements(that you can pause) it's not an rpg now? HOw silly is this gonna get?

Click to expand...

All he meant is there is a multitude of different taste and opinions. As for stalker being a rpg really? Its labeled and sold as a FPS. Must be nice living in make believe land.

Couchpotato said:

All he meant is there is a multitude of different taste and opinions. As for stalker being a rpg really? Its labeled and sold as a FPS. Must be nice living in make believe land.

Click to expand...

Maybe your right about stalker…was one thing that popped to mind. But I fail to see how you could see mass effect as anything but an rpg…sure it uses guns, is not turn based…but, it has choice and consquences, you develop a character, have an inventory(yes it is a bit more simplified but don't really miss it.) It has quests and tons of dialogue…Fallout is more of a shooter then it is. Hell, if you look at as the fact you shoot something then any time you use a range weapon in games like gothic for example it is playing a long the same way, do you consider gothic not an rpg since you can shoot people and it is actiony when in combat?

The more I read on here I think the more out of touch a lot on here, everyone knows that mass effect is very close to the style the knights of the old republic were.

Alrik has never even played mass effect, if he has then he clearly did not understand it at all.

rune_74 said:

Maybe your right about stalker…was one thing that popped to mind. But I fail to see how you could see mass effect as anything but an rpg…sure it uses guns, is not turn based…but, it has choice and consquences, you develop a character, have an inventory(yes it is a bit more simplified but don't really miss it.) It has quests and tons of dialogue…Fallout is more of a shooter then it is. Hell, if you look at as the fact you shoot something then any time you use a range weapon in games like gothic for example it is playing a long the same way, do you consider gothic not an rpg since you can shoot people and it is actiony when in combat?

The more I read on here I think the more out of touch a lot on here, everyone knows that mass effect is very close to the style the knights of the old republic were.

Alrik has never even played mass effect, if he has then he clearly did not understand it at all.

Click to expand...

I enjoyed both games but ME2 felt like something was missing to me. It felt like watching daytime television instead of playing a game. It's not the combat model that bothers me.

At least part three story campaign promises to be like the original no more playing missions to earn there loyalty.

Couchpotato said:

I enjoyed both games but ME2 felt like something was missing to me. It felt like watching daytime television instead of playing a game. It's not the combat model that bothers me.

At least part three story campaign promises to be like the original no more playing missions to earn there loyalty.

Click to expand...

Obviously it comes down to personal tastes/preferences… But for me a predefined (voiced) protagonist plays a huge role in player/character disassociation(in terms of RPGs where, for me, there are comparatively different expectations say to a pure FPS). Some might characterize that as bordering on LARPing, however IMO a good RPG allows for the player to experience a specific role/archetype(rogue/thief, wizard/mage, fighter/warrior, et cetera). And within the confines of said role/character, whose abilities are bound by the laws of the gameworld/universe(suspension of disbelief), the possibility to affect various decisions/outcomes(on a micro and/or macro level) by use of your role's/character's inherent strengths(or weaknesses) and thus build/create an experience that is (even if illusory) wholly yours.

A predefined protagonist may allow for a tighter narrative, but you aren't really playing your character. You are seeing the world and it's events through the lens of the character your are at best controlling at worst merely influencing. As an example, this is true of TW where Geralt's past/flash backs define more about your character and his motivations than anything else. Nearly everything you do while controlling Geralt is reflected upon, and disseminated from his POV.

Sure, while controlling Geralt you are also playing the role of a witcher… But it is experienced entirely from Geralt's perspective, thus there is little in the way of player -> character ownership/association. Which, in my opinion, doesn't really allow the player to connect with the played character on a level befitting a medium that is generally defined by it's interactivity/immersion. It is why I am drawn to games, as a medium games have the potential to be more engaging and involving than say books or movies - RPGs doubly so.

So, for me it comes down to avoiding the trap of defining what an RPG may or may not be, but defining what a good RPG is to me… Classifying a game as a good or bad RPG, does not necessarily have any bearing on whether or not the game is enjoyable for whatever it may be… Unless of course you come into the game expecting to find a compelling role playing experience.

-EDIT-

The assumed or selected role/predefined archetype(and skills+abilities) of the PC should provide a framework/guide for what is ultimately the experience… The real issue is the difficulty of developing a genuine RP experience(IE avoiding a predefined voiced protagonist) set within a branching narrative and evolving gameworld(aka meaningful C&C).

-EDIT- #2

As for ME as a good RPG… Where in the game does the assumed role/class/skills/ect define or influence the choices available to you? There are no speech or skill checks. No, there are Shepard checks… You decide whether Shepard is naughty or nice and depending on the level of naughtiness or niceness you have rolled gain access to further naughty or nice responses/actions. There is only character controlling/influencing of Shep, as outcomes are based on shep's character and not his role/archetype, skills or natural abilities.

Well I don't know, I mean planescape torment had a predefined protaganist and virtually no character customization beyond picking one of 3 classes, none of which had an influence on your interaction with NPCs. And that is generally considered one of the best RPGs of all time.

As for how your skills define your choices in ME2, your role or skill set can make a pretty big difference in actual combat in that game, and that's how really the place where roles tend to have the most influence in every RPG.

But ultimately it just matters what you enjoy, and if you prefer games where you can create your own nondiscript character there's nothing wrong with that. I enjoy doing that sometimes too.

fadedc said:

Well I don't know, I mean planescape torment had a predefined protaganist and virtually no character customization beyond picking one of 3 classes, none of which had an influence on your interaction with NPCs. And that is generally considered one of the best RPGs of all time.

As for how your skills define your choices in ME2, your role or skill set can make a pretty big difference in actual combat in that game, and that's how really the place where roles tend to have the most influence in every RPG.

But ultimately it just matters what you enjoy, and if you prefer games where you can create your own nondiscript character there's nothing wrong with that. I enjoy doing that sometimes too.

Click to expand...

Well, PS:T and TNO are mold breaking - his previous lives and the setting itself(and their role/importance)… Despite the fact that he was predefined and lacked character creation, the game itself was still interactive/reactive. I mean it's been ages since I played it, but IIRC TNO's personality and his story are very interactive - to the point that you can take ownership of his role/actions in the story(it also helps that you are nameless, voiceless and have awoken with amnesia - the premise that every time you die you're born anew defines your/his nature and does quite a for setting the plot + suspension of disbelief).

But stats did affect dialog options and certain outcomes… IIRC wisdom was tied to unlocking memories too, right? Stats have a big impact on the game… There really is no comparison to games like ME or TW, dialog available in PS:T was mind blowing by comparison(quantity and choices). IMO a voiced protagonist is a huge limitation - If you have to voice every question/statement and response you have to limit the available choices/responses/outcomes/ect... Not to mention the effect of a voiced line where it's prosodic delivery falls short.

Awe shoot, I think I'll have to find my ancient four PS:T CDs and reinstall the game now… Thanks.

fadedc said:

Well I don't know, I mean planescape torment had a predefined protaganist and virtually no character customization beyond picking one of 3 classes, none of which had an influence on your interaction with NPCs. And that is generally considered one of the best RPGs of all time.

As for how your skills define your choices in ME2, your role or skill set can make a pretty big difference in actual combat in that game, and that's how really the place where roles tend to have the most influence in every RPG.

But ultimately it just matters what you enjoy, and if you prefer games where you can create your own nondiscript character there's nothing wrong with that. I enjoy doing that sometimes too.

Click to expand...

I agree I was just saying 70 percent of the game was just loyalty missions with a climax ending. There writers must be losing there edge.

Stats played a significant part in dialog in PS:T, but not really class. I'm a little fuzzy now on what the actual character creation process was, but I'm pretty sure that it was easy enough to have good scores in all the important dialog skills without hurting yourself much in combat. I do remember a bit towards the end where I had to use a temporary stat boosting item to get the results I wanted.

I think it's less about any set rule like voice or whather your character has memory of past events and more about just how good the game is. PS:T was just a great game, and I think it would have been just as great if it hadn't been made at a time when technical limitations prevented large amounts of voice acting. And if you think about it, your character was a wierd freak of nature with a face that looked like it had gone through the meat grinder. I'd consider him to be about as far from a "neutral" character as possible. You could choose his personality as you went along, but that's true in most games including the ME series.

I also think we just have a tendency to glorify games we loved long ago because we were just much simpler and less jaded people back then. No game will ever beat PS:T for me because I can never go back to being an easily impressed college freshman again.

MasterKromm said:

Well, PS:T and TNO are mold breaking - his previous lives and the setting itself(and their role/importance)… Despite the fact that he was predefined and lacked character creation, the game itself was still interactive/reactive. I mean it's been ages since I played it, but IIRC TNO's personality and his story are very interactive - to the point that you can take ownership of his role/actions in the story(it also helps that you are nameless, voiceless and have awoken with amnesia - the premise that every time you die you're born anew defines your/his nature and does quite a for setting the plot + suspension of disbelief).

But stats did affect dialog options and certain outcomes… IIRC wisdom was tied to unlocking memories too, right? Stats have a big impact on the game… There really is no comparison to games like ME or TW, dialog available in PS:T was mind blowing by comparison(quantity and choices). IMO a voiced protagonist is a huge limitation - If you have to voice every question/statement and response you have to limit the available choices/responses/outcomes/ect… Not to mention the effect of a voiced line where it's prosodic delivery falls short.

Awe shoot, I think I'll have to find my ancient four PS:T CDs and reinstall the game now… Thanks.

Click to expand...

fadedc said:

I also think we just have a tendency to glorify games we loved long ago because we were just much simpler and less jaded people back then.

Click to expand...

There is truth in this.

... "Blurred memories" ...