234 réponses à ce sujet

[kraidy1117]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

It's sci-fi and in the feture for christsakes. Who cares abouyt wheels?

Again this is your self-defeating point that favors the Mako. Thw wheel was invented 5000 years ago and it will be relevant in the coming centuries, with or without eezo. Why do you think Lunar and Martian exploration vehicles roll on wheels (not ever caterpillars)? It's more efficient.

And the idea of a hover vehicle for space exploration is just outright retarded. What is it supposed to hover in no air conditions?

Two words for you, star wars. ME takes place in the feture, the Hammerhead makes more sence then the MAKO.

U-huh. Like lazer beams being visible in space. Sure.

Who cares? Why do people always bring the it's not relistic argument? It's a game, not real. Star Trek has beams in space for crying out loud....

Because back in ME1 it all made much more sense. And it's a pity that a would-be good sci-fi francise is brought down so soon to the level of Star Wars and Star Trek, just because the crowd wants more special effects, ****** and cornball, and "who cares?" about all the rest.

ME seriesi s a good sci-fi franchise. Wah theres no wheels so it sucks! Wah theres ammo it sucks. Wah the health regenarates it sucks. Man there is so many babies on this board it is not even funny.

[kraidy1117]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

It's sci-fi and in the feture for christsakes. Who cares abouyt wheels?

Again this is your self-defeating point that favors the Mako. Thw wheel was invented 5000 years ago and it will be relevant in the coming centuries, with or without eezo. Why do you think Lunar and Martian exploration vehicles roll on wheels (not ever caterpillars)? It's more efficient.

And the idea of a hover vehicle for space exploration is just outright retarded. What is it supposed to hover in no air conditions?

Two words for you, star wars. ME takes place in the feture, the Hammerhead makes more sence then the MAKO.

U-huh. Like lazer beams being visible in space. Sure.

Who cares? Why do people always bring the it's not relistic argument? It's a game, not real. Star Trek has beams in space for crying out loud....

Because the effect of realism is the introduction of challenge.  IF a game isn't challenging then it isn't very fun.

You are a complete and utter moron you know that?No game is relistic at all, more importly sci-fi has never and will never be relistic. Why? Because it would be borining. There is no sound in space and only one Star Trek did that right and it was a mvoie. There is no fire in space, yet many sci-fi games including ME have fire in space. I can go on and on.

But what about the challenge?  How challenging is the Hammerhead?

The Hammerhead makes more sence for sci-fi then a big tank with wheels that is slow as anything.

[GuardianAngel470]

kraidy1117 wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

It's sci-fi and in the feture for christsakes. Who cares abouyt wheels?

Again this is your self-defeating point that favors the Mako. Thw wheel was invented 5000 years ago and it will be relevant in the coming centuries, with or without eezo. Why do you think Lunar and Martian exploration vehicles roll on wheels (not ever caterpillars)? It's more efficient.

And the idea of a hover vehicle for space exploration is just outright retarded. What is it supposed to hover in no air conditions?

Two words for you, star wars. ME takes place in the feture, the Hammerhead makes more sence then the MAKO.

U-huh. Like lazer beams being visible in space. Sure.

Who cares? Why do people always bring the it's not relistic argument? It's a game, not real. Star Trek has beams in space for crying out loud....

Because the effect of realism is the introduction of challenge.  IF a game isn't challenging then it isn't very fun.

You are a complete and utter moron you know that?No game is relistic at all, more importly sci-fi has never and will never be relistic. Why? Because it would be borining. There is no sound in space and only one Star Trek did that right and it was a mvoie. There is no fire in space, yet many sci-fi games including ME have fire in space. I can go on and on.

I'll concede that you can call me a moron twice but that doesn't change the fact that the two examples you  mentioned are special effects and don't affect gameplay, thus they lie outside my point.  Video games try to be realistic because they want to maintain suspension of disbelief.  And the important part of my point is that there needs to be a challenge.  FnF missiles aren't challenging, they are boring.

[TheLostGenius]

Summary of thread:



Some people approve of the Hammerhead and think its better than the Mako. Some people prefer the Mako to the Hammerhead. Some people HATE the Mako and LOVE the Hammerhead. Some people even despise the hammerhead and love the Mako, despite any shortcomings either of them have.

[GuardianAngel470]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

You didn't answer my question.......

I think we've gotten about as much as we can from Kraidy, Johnny. He seems to be fraying at the edges.

Modifié par GuardianAngel470, 28 mars 2010 - 03:10 .

[kraidy1117]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

You didn't answer my question.......

Depends, if you mean by gameplay point of view, you have move and dodge more or you will die very quickly, way diffrent then the MAKO.

[KotOREffecT]

TheLostGenius wrote...

Summary of thread:

Some people approve of the Hammerhead and think its better than the Mako. Some people prefer the Mako to the Hammerhead. Some people HATE the Mako and LOVE the Hammerhead. Some people even despise the hammerhead and love the Mako, despite any shortcomings either of them have.

Pretty much it Genius.

Here's the unfortunant but likely solution that BioWare will take.

Cut the Hammerhead from ME 3 instead of updating it like what happened with the Mak in ME 2. That way nobody wins in the end.

That very well may happen...

To bad they just don't fine tune both of them up and put them in ME 3 for the players who like one over the other.

[KotOREffecT]

KotOREffecT wrote...

TheLostGenius wrote...

Summary of thread:

Some people approve of the Hammerhead and think its better than the Mako. Some people prefer the Mako to the Hammerhead. Some people HATE the Mako and LOVE the Hammerhead. Some people even despise the hammerhead and love the Mako, despite any shortcomings either of them have.

Pretty much it Genius.

Here's the unfortunant but likely solution that BioWare will take.

Cut the Hammerhead from ME 3 instead of updating it like what happened with the Mako in ME 2. That way nobody wins in the end.

That very well may happen...

To bad they just don't fine tune both of them up and put them in ME 3 for the players who like one over the other.

[Cascadus]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

It's sci-fi and in the feture for christsakes. Who cares abouyt wheels?

Again this is your self-defeating point that favors the Mako. Thw wheel was invented 5000 years ago and it will be relevant in the coming centuries, with or without eezo. Why do you think Lunar and Martian exploration vehicles roll on wheels (not ever caterpillars)? It's more efficient.

And the idea of a hover vehicle for space exploration is just outright retarded. What is it supposed to hover in no air conditions?

Two words for you, star wars. ME takes place in the feture, the Hammerhead makes more sence then the MAKO.

U-huh. Like lazer beams being visible in space. Sure.

Who cares? Why do people always bring the it's not relistic argument? It's a game, not real. Star Trek has beams in space for crying out loud....

Yes, it's the future and it DOESN'T MAKE SENSE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE UNIVERSE. Stop comparing Mass Effect to Star Trek or Star Wars. Mass Effect is not any of them. It follows a set list of laws that happen to include the laws of physics. You can't magic away everything especially when ME1 put forward a far more realistic 'future' that is passed over for cleavage in zero-gee environments.
Stop throwing 'it's the FUTURE' at people. It's not a valid argument and stop trying to pretend it is one by trying to magic away the flaws. Here's a very nice segment of Atomic Rocket that proves surprisingly relevant to this all:

So What If I Broke Twelve Laws Of Physics? It's Only Science FICTION"

This silly opinion implies that the word "fiction" nullifies the word "science."
Since it is "fiction", and fiction is by definition "not true", then
we can make "not true" any and all science that gets in the way, right?

Hogwash. By the same logic, the term "detective fiction" gives
the author license to totally ignore
standard procedures and techniques used by
detectives, the term "military fiction" allows the author
to totally ignore military tactics and strategy,
and the term "historical fiction" allows the author
to totally ignore the relevant history.









Imagine a historical fiction novel where Napoleon at Waterloo defeated the
knights of the Round Table by using the Enola Gay to drop an atom bomb.
It's OK because it is "fiction", right?

This non-argument is the favorite of science fiction fans who
like all the zipping spaceships and ray guns but who actually know
practically nothing about real science. And who cannot be bothered
to go learn.

In the presence of people
who are indeed scientifically literate, such fans tend to get very defensive
about their lack of knowledge. The non-argument is a feeble attempt at
compensating for their shortcomings by attempting to forbid the
others from using their knowledge.

Slightly more difficult to deal with, but still
operating under a flawed concept
are those fans with little or no technical background, who think that
they can take a "shortcut" to advanced scientific knowledge by skipping over the
usual years of hard work in university, and simply reading some books on quantum
mechanics. It doesn't work that way

Modifié par Cascadus, 28 mars 2010 - 03:15 .

[kraidy1117]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...

You didn't answer my question.......

Depends, if you mean by gameplay point of view, you have move and dodge more or you will die very quickly, way diffrent then the MAKO.

To me the combat was way easier in the Hammerhead.  Now as far as playing leapfrog goes, that took a little bit getting used to. 

The MAKO was only hard on insanity. I have died on casual once when vs the two Colosus. Thats the challange part, you can't take alot of damage, each to there own.

[Zulu_DFA]

kraidy1117 wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

It's sci-fi and in the feture for christsakes. Who cares abouyt wheels?

Again this is your self-defeating point that favors the Mako. Thw wheel was invented 5000 years ago and it will be relevant in the coming centuries, with or without eezo. Why do you think Lunar and Martian exploration vehicles roll on wheels (not ever caterpillars)? It's more efficient.

And the idea of a hover vehicle for space exploration is just outright retarded. What is it supposed to hover in no air conditions?

Two words for you, star wars. ME takes place in the feture, the Hammerhead makes more sence then the MAKO.

U-huh. Like lazer beams being visible in space. Sure.

Who cares? Why do people always bring the it's not relistic argument? It's a game, not real. Star Trek has beams in space for crying out loud....

Because the effect of realism is the introduction of challenge.  IF a game isn't challenging then it isn't very fun.

You are a complete and utter moron you know that?No game is relistic at all, more importly sci-fi has never and will never be relistic. Why? Because it would be borining. There is no sound in space and only one Star Trek did that right and it was a mvoie. There is no fire in space, yet many sci-fi games including ME have fire in space. I can go on and on.

Do you know what the "sci" stands for? It stands for "science" and it means realism. Why doesn't shepard use a flying carpet? It's a game after all... And there is fire in space, since fire is any gas hot enough to be visible. As for the sound, yes it was annoying in ME1, by in ME2 90% of things just insult the common sense, starting with Miranda's high heels.

[KotOREffecT]

The thing that sucked about the Mako was trying to back up and get the missle launcher situated at times, esp when your getting ass raped by a Geth Collossus and a bunch of Geth. With the Hammerhead, you never have this problem. Just swoop on by and clip it and unload a few missles then fly around and take cover.

[kraidy1117]

Cascadus wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

It's sci-fi and in the feture for christsakes. Who cares abouyt wheels?

Again this is your self-defeating point that favors the Mako. Thw wheel was invented 5000 years ago and it will be relevant in the coming centuries, with or without eezo. Why do you think Lunar and Martian exploration vehicles roll on wheels (not ever caterpillars)? It's more efficient.

And the idea of a hover vehicle for space exploration is just outright retarded. What is it supposed to hover in no air conditions?

Two words for you, star wars. ME takes place in the feture, the Hammerhead makes more sence then the MAKO.

U-huh. Like lazer beams being visible in space. Sure.

Who cares? Why do people always bring the it's not relistic argument? It's a game, not real. Star Trek has beams in space for crying out loud....

Yes, it's the future and it DOESN'T MAKE SENSE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE UNIVERSE. Stop comparing Mass Effect to Star Trek or Star Wars. Mass Effect is not any of them. It follows a set list of laws that happen to include the laws of physics. You can't magic away everything especially when ME1 put forward a far more realistic 'future' that is passed over for cleavage in zero-gee environments.
Stop throwing 'it's the FUTURE' at people. It's not a valid argument and stop trying to pretend it is one by trying to magic away the flaws. Here's a very nice segment of Atomic Rocket that proves surprisingly relevant to this all:

So What If I Broke Twelve Laws Of Physics? It's Only Science FICTION"

This silly opinion implies that the word "fiction" nullifies the word "science."
Since it is "fiction", and fiction is by definition "not true", then
we can make "not true" any and all science that gets in the way, right?

Hogwash. By the same logic, the term "detective fiction" gives
the author license to totally ignore
standard procedures and techniques used by
detectives, the term "military fiction" allows the author
to totally ignore military tactics and strategy,
and the term "historical fiction" allows the author
to totally ignore the relevant history.









Imagine a historical fiction novel where Napoleon at Waterloo defeated the
knights of the Round Table by using the Enola Gay to drop an atom bomb.
It's OK because it is "fiction", right?

This non-argument is the favorite of science fiction fans who
like all the zipping spaceships and ray guns but who actually know
practically nothing about real science. And who cannot be bothered
to go learn.

In the presence of people
who are indeed scientifically literate, such fans tend to get very defensive
about their lack of knowledge. The non-argument is a feeble attempt at
compensating for their shortcomings by attempting to forbid the
others from using their knowledge.

Slightly more difficult to deal with, but still
operating under a flawed concept
are those fans with little or no technical background, who think that
they can take a "shortcut" to advanced scientific knowledge by skipping over the
usual years of hard work in university, and simply reading some books on quantum
mechanics. It doesn't work that way

Its the feture and it's a game. If you want to bring this crap up good for you, but there is fire and sound in space in ME and ME2 so ya your argument is useless.

[kraidy1117]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

It's sci-fi and in the feture for christsakes. Who cares abouyt wheels?

Again this is your self-defeating point that favors the Mako. Thw wheel was invented 5000 years ago and it will be relevant in the coming centuries, with or without eezo. Why do you think Lunar and Martian exploration vehicles roll on wheels (not ever caterpillars)? It's more efficient.

And the idea of a hover vehicle for space exploration is just outright retarded. What is it supposed to hover in no air conditions?

Two words for you, star wars. ME takes place in the feture, the Hammerhead makes more sence then the MAKO.

U-huh. Like lazer beams being visible in space. Sure.

Who cares? Why do people always bring the it's not relistic argument? It's a game, not real. Star Trek has beams in space for crying out loud....

Because the effect of realism is the introduction of challenge.  IF a game isn't challenging then it isn't very fun.

You are a complete and utter moron you know that?No game is relistic at all, more importly sci-fi has never and will never be relistic. Why? Because it would be borining. There is no sound in space and only one Star Trek did that right and it was a mvoie. There is no fire in space, yet many sci-fi games including ME have fire in space. I can go on and on.

Do you know what the "sci" stands for? It stands for "science" and it means realism. Why doesn't shepard use a flying carpet? It's a game after all... And there is fire in space, since fire is any gas hot enough to be visible. As for the sound, yes it was annoying in ME1, by in ME2 90% of things just insult the common sense, starting with Miranda's high heels.

No theres not Zulu. Fire needs oxygen. When the Normandy blows up, there should not have been fire, yet there is. That is not relistic so trying to bring in it's not relistic is just plain stupid. Hell we got people like Miri and others walking around with face mask or in Jacks case with nipples starps, in zero tempture areas, yes thats relistic.

Modifié par kraidy1117, 28 mars 2010 - 03:20 .

[Srslydude01]

TheLostGenius wrote...

Summary of thread:

Some people approve of the Hammerhead and think its better than the Mako. Some people prefer the Mako to the Hammerhead. Some people HATE the Mako and LOVE the Hammerhead. Some people even despise the hammerhead and love the Mako, despite any shortcomings either of them have.

You are a Genius! You spoiled the ending of this thread for me hehe. I guess I'll go to another thread now.

[kraidy1117]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

@kraidy1117
Did you a few bong hits right before this debate?

No I did not. You can not bring in the talk of being relistic in a video game. To do it is just stupid. Thats like me saying it's not relistic that Shepard can get shot with five missles before he dies..... or that he can die and magicly respawn at an old checkpoint.

[Zulu_DFA]

KotOREffecT wrote...

TheLostGenius wrote...

Summary of thread:

Some people approve of the Hammerhead and think its better than the Mako. Some people prefer the Mako to the Hammerhead. Some people HATE the Mako and LOVE the Hammerhead. Some people even despise the hammerhead and love the Mako, despite any shortcomings either of them have.

Pretty much it Genius.

Here's the unfortunant but likely solution that BioWare will take.

Cut the Hammerhead from ME 3 instead of updating it like what happened with the Mak in ME 2. That way nobody wins in the end.

That very well may happen...

To bad they just don't fine tune both of them up and put them in ME 3 for the players who like one over the other.

That'll be fair at least.

I just hope the Hammerhead is BioWares test project for the spacefighter combat, which, if I am right, seems to have some good potential. But as a planetary exploration anf IFV the Hammerhead utterly sucks.

[KotOREffecT]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

@kraidy1117
Did you a few bong hits right before this debate? 

[TheLostGenius]

They should cut the Hammerhead from ME3 and just give Sheperd a Star Destroyer. Then he could go around blowing up planets with "bad guys on them" and the Reaper ships, with incredible ease.

[kraidy1117]

JohnnyDollar wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

JohnnyDollar wrote...

@kraidy1117
Did you a few bong hits right before this debate?

No I did not. You can not bring in the talk of being relistic in a video game. To do it is just stupid. Thats like me saying it's not relistic that Shepard can get shot with five missles before he dies..... or that he can die and magicly respawn at an old checkpoint.

It is not a matter of who is wrong or right here.  I  think though, your not hearing what they are trying to say. 

Guardian is a MAKO lover who is hostile to non MAKO fans, others are trying to pull the "it''s not relistic" argument which makes no sence because games are not relistic. Thats what I get from them. The Hammerhead just needs a coupld of upgrades and we are set to go. I am out of this thread now.