Poll: How to you like your RPGs?

[AngryBritishAce]

Well, Many of you will have noticed that Mass Effect 3 is getting a lot of hate, because many people are accusing it of either "simplifying" or taking out previous features and putting in new ones.

Now I have no problem with that, because I never really thought of ME as a RPG, just a shooter with RPG elements (Just as Dead Rising isn't a RPG, it just has a leveling system). However some are really offended by that and they are hating on the game quite a bit.

Now I just don't understand this. I view a RPG as the chance to (as Bethesda (the RPG gods) would put it) "Live another life, in another world." Yet others just (from what I've seen) care for little less than the stats and numbers (sorry if I'm wrong, it's just what I've observed)

And that strikes me odd about other tatical RPGs, like JRPGs such as Final Fantasy. Now I've played games like that but I just find it too slow. If I wanted, I could stand around and do nothing for an hour while the two enemies bob up and down on the spot, weapons raised, death staring each over.
Now don't get me wrong, I love variation in games, for instance, I like the skill involved in Dragon Age: Origins and having to keep making sure your party was healthy in Battle and using the right combonation of skills and powers to keep you alive.
But still I can't get my head around that all those numbers are what, as some gamers refer, "make an RPG."

So I'm confused. What IS a good RPG to most gamers. Is is the Numbers, or exploring new worlds? Or maybe you have another suggestion?

Either way, I would like to hear your opinion.



--- Oh and please, this isn't a debate on Mass Effect 3 or Final Fantasy, those were just examples ---

 

[BreakfastMan]

Well, I do like all of the above, but if I was forced to choose the one I like the most, I would have to choose a deep, personal, involving story-line with great characters, great writing, and a twisty-turny plot. All those other things are good and all (and sometimes they can even carry a game all by themselves), but I would have to say, a good plot is most important to me.

Of course, considering the piles of hate that DA2 and ME3 are getting I might be in the minority on this...

 

[darth.pixie]

Like Baldur was or Planescape or Arcanum. Being able to see a lot of environments but without it being forced. Not having to gather the 12 thingamajigs of doom. Not necessarily having a deep personal story but being able to make your character and plan accordingly. Make a diverse personality and being able to present it. I think Arcanum did it best there. You could literally create anything. Having characters that are more than pixels on a screen. And I like a full, live world.

Numbers are just numbers. If I can get used to the gameplay, I don't have a problem with it either way.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Bioware's aight. Their storytelling abilities aren't all that they're cracked up to be, but they're very good at creating a cast of characters. (One of the reasons I thought ME2 was such a good game.)

I cannot stand Bethesada - they couldn't write their way out of a paper box, and if I want to explore an open world, I'll walk outside. But I can understand why people like them - it's more of a personal preference than anything else. And they, whatever their faults, have an awesome modding community.

I personally lean towards stuff like The Witcher, Planescape: Torment, and Devil Survivor that tell a good story in a nonlinear way, or stuff like Tales of Symphonia and Skies of Arcadia that play with tropes and don't take themselves seriously.

 

[dibblywibbles]

I like my rpg's extra crispy with a side of action, problem solving and extra levels. I hate not having any levels left well before I'm done with a game. stats are important only if I'm not controlling the action. developing new skills as things go on is awesome, exploration is nifty keen but to keep me interested your story has to rock the house and have an ending, if not it's just boring pointless wow style grinding for loot. I basically love all rpgs(except for MMO's they're stupid) because they were like the first games I really got into; the fantasy settings went well with my D&D sensibilities.

 

[AlternatePFG]

I want to be able to play how I want. I want to be able to have a different skillset and personality between different playthroughs in RPGs, it's really what I like about the genre so much. I don't like being railroaded into quests, nor do I like it when you're given a straight up Good or Evil choice (Usually. I still love KOTOR but I think the Light/Dark thing works there because it's freaking Star Wars). Stats do come into play though, but that's simply because it allows you have many different types of characters and different ways of playing the game.

I've never particularly loved the Mass Effect series as to begin with. Both games have elements that I liked (ME1 had a really unique feel for an RPG at the time, good story too. ME2 had better gameplay, had some great loyalty missions) but there's just too many things that drag them down (ME1 had a horrible, horrible inventory system and interface. ME2 was too streamlined and the main plot just got ridiculous at some points). I'll admit that I still think ME2 is a great game, it just is a bad RPG.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

I don't get the Stats and Numbers crowd. DA:O did it and it's combat got flamed! Then DA2 and ME2 pulls it all out and THEY get flamed. What the fuck do you people want exactly? And how is MS Excel supposed to be the best RPG of all time anyway?

OT: Role Playing, to me, means I get to control Every aspect of an avatar in a (preferably innovative and cool) virtual world. And by "every aspect" I basically mean aspects other than Fighting and Moving. So If I decide how he/she interacts with people, that is, to me, an RPG. If I get to decide whether or not my avatar "Shepard punches" an annoying reporter, that is, to me, an RPG; because in an Action game, All of that would be pre-decided by the writers. And THAT'S where I draw the line. In RPGs writers hand some of the storytelling power into your hands. In non-RPGs they do not.

 

[Above]

Oblivion,Everything oblivion did was perfect,I Love that game so much

But i also like Mass effect from bioware,but i hate Dragon Age Alot.

So basically i like open world games,doing whatever i like whenever i want like Oblivion

but i also enjoy deep story games like mass effect.

 

[Defense]

I like games that follow a linear storyline but have a bit of freedom. Unique/beautiful environments are also a huge plus, because people get sick of high fantasy after seeing it in every single game.

The linear storyline thing is just a personal like of mine. Having too much freedom gives a game much less direction and less potential for a good storyline in my opinion.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Stats, numbers, and tactics.

I mean, I really just need an inventory to manage now and again and I'll be satisfied. I don't need a crazy amount of depth. I mean, I like Oblivion, and that's rather shallow in that department.

But DA:O and Final Fantasy 13 rank as my tops in terms of combat.

 

[Pearwood]

I don't get the Stats and Numbers crowd. DA:O did it and it's combat got flamed! Then DA2 and ME2 pulls it all out and THEY get flamed. What the fuck do you people want? And how is MS Excel supposed to be the best RPG anyway?

It was more the tactics that drew me to it, I don't care how big the numbers are I just want to be able to put real strategic thought into my gameplay and get a nice payoff from it.

 

[Juggern4ut20]

as Bethesda (the RPG gods)

That is a horrible choice of words. To me, an RPG has everything to do with the RP letters. Role Play. That means the stress on story, character development, and choices. The reason that I highlighted that point you simply threw out there was because Bethesda sucks at those, thus to me they are not even close to RPG gods.

Stats and numbers simply became associated with RPGs because thats how they create different main characters for you to play, but they are not what makes an RPG. ALL games have started implementing some sort of leveling system, from shooters to racing games, but in my mind that does not make them RPGs.

 

[Kahunaburger]

nor do I like it when you're given a straight up Good or Evil choice (Usually. I still love KOTOR but I think the Light/Dark thing works there because it's freaking Star Wars).

QFT.

[rant]This is a huge issue I have with most bioware games. They pitched the morality system of Jade Empire as Quasi-Confucianism vs. Law of the Jungle, but it ended up being cartoonish good vs. cartoonish evil.

Dragon Age purportedly was more about each individual character's take on things - Morrigan, for instance, had her own enmities and hang-ups due to her upbringing, etc. But apparently the people writing the dialogue didn't send the memo to the people deciding the characters' reactions to story events, because it ended up being the "good" characters liking cartoonish good decisions, Morrigan liking cartoonish evil decisions, and the rare odd man out like Sten or Justice actually following their own moral codes.

Mass Effect 2 was half of a good thing - Picard vs. Jack Bauer is more interesting than good vs. evil, but the mechanics were such that if you wanted to persuade anyone you had to pick a side vs. exploring a nuanced character.

And don't even get me started on Bioshock. A setting that should be about critically examining the tension between Objectivist morality and real-world morality, but ended up being about saving little girls vs. eating little girls?

That's why stuff like The Witcher and Devil Survivor are so good - less about picking good and evil, more about exploring the consequences of your decisions.[/rant]

 

[linwolf]

For me it's all about the Stats and Numbers, it's what makes an RPG for me. I demand a good story from all my games so that is nothing special.

Edit:
Oh and tactics that should almost go without saying, deep tactics is what makes a great RPG combat. Look at The Witcher the combat was nothing special but the pre-time you had to do before made me enjoy it greatly.

 

[somonels]

All of them. Though since I moonlight between DMs and campaigns as a sort of recurring plot device, character growth is somewhat difficult for me.

 

[ImperialSunlight]

To me an RPG can be judged based on the player's ability to create characters and stories within the game rather than simply being told one. It should be open and allow the player to be as creative as possible about their characters. It should also avoid possible contradictions with this. For instance, in Dragon age II I played as a blood mage, yet I constantly was forced to speak against them because they're "Evil". This ruins the immersion quite a bit.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Stats, numbers, and tactics.

I mean, I really just need an inventory to manage now and again and I'll be satisfied.

But DA:O and Final Fantasy 13 rank as my tops in terms of combat.

I waffle between this and open world-esque games. One minute I want to play Origins/Pokemon, the next I want to play New Vegas/Persona 4.