[quote]SithLordExarKun wrote...
Did even
you read what
i said? Its not just the items being worthless but the horrible way the inventory system was implemented with hordes of useless items overwhelming your inventory.
The concept of an inventory system is never bad, it was just poorly executed and designed in the first game. They chose to drop it because the inventory in the first game was
useless. Rather than try to improve something so horribly designed and useless(because the majority of items were useless), they chose to scrap it.[/quote]
And the word of the day is "useless"
Jokes aside, yes... what you said is mostly true: they chose to scrap it because the old inventory was poor. But that doesn't mean, as I've already stated several times now, you can't solve the problem by replacing the "useless" inventory with better inventory. Why can't there be a mix of both systems where you limit the amount of repeatedly samey equipment by using the scanning method that only leaves you with one of each item ala ME2, but with a greater selection of moddable weapons with stats ala ME1? At least ME1 adhered to the basic RPG principle of your items being groups of similar types whose rank and comparative value are determined by visible stats as opposed to ME2's tiny handful of weapons that there are only one of pretty much with no visible stats and no true comparisons beyond the way they feel to shoot, ala a standard shooter.
[quote]
People were complaining of the horrible inventory system, so this alone makes you point all moot.[/quote]
Uh... okay. So my point is moot because people complained about the inventory? So... the inventory CAN'T possibly be fixed or implemented better because people didn't like it? It just has to go completely... just like that.
I have to say, it's also funny to see how many complaints about ME1 only seemed to become prominent, and, yes, even exist at all, once ME2 was already out and released. I've seriously seen so many issues come up about ME1 in the last few months that fans of ME2 claim to have existed since the game's birth, yet I've barely or never seen before that. The way some people talk about the original game since ME2's release you'd think it was a colossal failure and joke along the lines of Shaq Fu, E.T. and Rise of the Robots.
[quote]Terror_K wrote...
You have far less crap to deal with and only the essential items remain, i don't know how ME2's system is "shallow and linear" when you can actually upgrade and research unlike the useless mods you pick up from the first game out of nowhere which makes little to no difference at all.[/quote]
First of all, you answered your own question at the start of the very sentence you asked it in: "you have far less crap to deal with and only the essential items remain"
Yes, when ONLY the essential items remain, of course you have far less crap to deal with. You also have far less choice and vartiation and completely eliminate the RPG notion of inventory and items entirely. One needs to have crap items in an RPG to separate and identify them from the rare and good items. ME2 completely lacks this facet entirely, because it ONLY has a tiny selection of weapons and armour that are always in the same places every time and there's no challenge or difficulty or hard work to find and attain them.
This is why the system is shallow and linear, because there really is no choice: its all inevitable, without any hunting or work at all. The game basically hands you everything, all you need to do is go along for the ride. There are no common items and there are no good items because there really aren't ANY items at all... just statless weapons that are always the same, always there and have no real selection at all. It's no different from playing DOOM and eventually getting to the BFG or any other weapon that's just always there in the same place.
Secondly, I personally found the mods you put in your weapons to make quite a difference. You try playing on one of the harder difficulties in ME1 all the way through with your crap starter weapons, your Onyx I armour and no mods whatsoever and see how easy things are as you progress. You'll be begging for Colossus X, Spectre Master Gear and some mods to use before you're even halfway through, or even just some level V or VI gear of any type. You tell me that that +500 weapons force and damage in my sniper rifle isn't making a difference as I one-shot 90% of my enemies later on. Now tell me the same with Mass Effect 2. No, you can't... because in ME2 you can just stick with the same armour and the same weapon and it doesn't make a lick of difference in end-game.
[quote]ME2 at the least had that sense of feel where you actually upgrade a weapon rather than ME1's system of inserting an utterly useless mod and seeing little difference. Did i not mention how you could upgrade the normandy even? Omg by jour logik that means mass efckt 2 is deeper and m0re complex!![/quote]
Yes, because as we know, when one has a jug of ten litres of water, tips it all out and then puts a single litre of water in the jug again, you have eleven litres of water. <_<
For starters, I don't personally think the weapon upgrades in ME2 produced any more or less noticable difference than the mods in the original game. In some cases, the original game's mods made a huge difference (+500 weapon force and damage for example in a Sniper Rifle). Maybe its the way things level up in ME2, but for the most part the upgrades didn't seem to make things noticably different in my books. I just get them as I can and when I remember. I got near end game using the Heavy Pistol with only a single upgrade, the upgraded it four times, and sure it was better, but it wasn't a huuuge jump.
Secondly, we both know the upgrades to The Normandy for the most part aren't technically upgrades in a stat or ability boosting sense so much as they determine certain factors towards end-game with regards to the storyline. Simply put, they're mostly a plot-driven device rather than a gameplay one. Sure there's also faster scanning and more probes and fuel, but these are singular upgrades without any tiers, and actually barely effect the core gameplay at all besides making sure you don't get RSI quite as fast and don't have to return to fuel stations quite so much. Fuel and probe purchasing is also largely pointless in the first place too.
[quote]
Theres no "variation" in ME1 at all unlike ME2 with just 3 generic armors slapped with different textures.[/quote]
You're looking at them purely from a physical standpoint. Again, you play on the harder difficulties with Onyx I and then do the same with Colossus X and seriously tell me there's no difference. The armours in ME1 had stats and values and strengths and weaknesses. I can (and have) stuck with mostly the same armour in ME2 that I had at the start and it makes no difference whatsoever.
[quote]
Right, i forgot you can't choose which chest plate, which helmet, which glove you want to equip.....[/quote]
This is essentially cosmetic. Your armour doesn't really effect that much at all in combat. And, again, I can wear the same default N7 stuff and stick through the entire game without problems. What's the point in even getting other types beyond cosmetic vanity?
[quote]And each weapon DOES feel unique, in ME1, all the weapons of the same class felt the
exact same when you fired them. In ME2 theres an assault rifle which has burst fire unlike ME1 where all weapons essentially fire the same so once again your assertions of weapons having no variation in ME2 is torn apart.[/quote]
No, the weapons in ME2
have no variation, because there's essentially one type of each weapon and that's it. People worrying about the "feel of" a weapon is a purely shooter dynamic, since in RPG's a weapon's ability and worth are determined by its type, its statistical levels and whatever bonuses it may have on it. This concept has been completely thrown out the window in ME2 and replaced by a single weapon of each kind that you get and then stick with for the rest of the game. On top of that, the game pretty much chooses these weapons for you, so you can just let it do all the work. If DAO had only one or two longswords in the entire game people would have a fit: its only because ME2 has basically become a shooter now that people accept the complete lack of selection and stat-based weapons
[quote]
And what "customization" is there in ME1? How does inserting a useless mod into a weapon or armor that essentially doesn't make any difference defence,damage and aesthetic wise?[/quote]
Because at least the weapon is actually customisable that way. It allows you to change the weapon and tweak it to your liking. There's NOTHING in ME2 that allows you to customise a weapon and alter its defense, damage and aesthetic attributes anyway. There's upgrades, but those are linear inevitables that pretty much every player will get and they have no trade-offs whatsoever. With limited modding you had to make a choice as to how you wanted your weapon to be: with ME2 there is no choice or trade-off, simply upgrades your can pile up until you have them all and the weapon is perfect.
And, again, I don't personally think the mods in ME1 were anywhere near as "useless" as you say they were. Like much of your arguments against ME1, I think you're exaggerating how "useless" or bad things were in order to make your point. I don't agree with your assessment, so I won't cave to your claims. And I think you're one of those players who wants instant gratification from any change or upgrade you make, which is not what a good RPG is about. One should earn their improvements through diligence, smart choices and gradual improvement: just just because they want the next upgrade or level up to give them more because they demand it or want it or their ADD-riddled brains may get bored if they don't see a result straight away. I'm not saying you're guilty of the following, but I've seen so many hypocrites complain that ME1 gave you barely any increase in anything with each skill point, and yet also complain that at the start of the game you suck too much and at the end you're an unstoppable God. Isn't that just a
little contradictory?
[quote]
I don't see how equiping the same exact armor with a different texture(in ME1) make it any deeper.
In fact the customization in ME2 makes your own character unique and standout from all the generic crappy armor you wear in the first game.[/quote]
Because the armour there at least DID something, had visible stats that determined its strengths and weaknesses and could be modded. The fact that the model of the armour was the same is irrelevant. ME2 instead has four vanilla armours, but they aren't all that different and are pretty much purely cosmetic. Your survival in game never depends on them and they can't be modded or truly customised beyond their paint jobs.
Again, its mostly fluff. I don't hate that you can customise the look of your armour. In fact, quite the contrary... I like it. But when so much more could have been added to this game to give it real depth where it was most needed, it seems like a waste that essentially pointless stuff like that is there.
[quote]See the above, you obviously prefer useless mods and a trash vendor with useless items over the upgrades in ME2 which actually makes a big difference.[/quote]
Again, you exaggerate on both sides to make your point. The mods weren't as useless as you say, and the upgrades weren't as prominent and earth-shattering as you say either: they're on about par, except that the mods tended to offer additional bonuses that didn't previously exist while the research stuff mostly boosted existing factors of the weapon. I personally think the best option is to have both: use the research system to basically level-up your weapon and the mods to customise it and add some additional features.
[quote]Yet you tried to tell me that ME1 implemented it better than ME2 which it didn't. Too bad that ME2's shooter mechanics are alot better improved than ME1's supposed "deeper shooter mechanics".[/quote]
It implemented it better than ME2 by default, because ME2 didn't even have it. ME2 can't be better at something the original game did if its not even present. That's like saying your car is better at flying than my plane, even if my plane has a broken wing.
And of course ME2's shooter mechanics are improved over ME1's... that's part of the problem: too many improved shooter mechanics and next to no improved RPG ones. All you're doing is admitting that ME2 is more of a shooter by saying that.
[quote]How does having useless items in a trash vendor means its more varied and deeper? Once again, how does this make the game less of an RPG?
Your whole concept is "No rubbish inventory = not RPG and is a meat headed shooter".[/quote]
No, my concept is the complete lack of any inventory --inventory
system or not-- with no RPG elements on what remains whatosever and half of the statistical skills of the original game being completely scrapped are what makes the game less of an RPG. And when I say "less of an RPG" I mean more in spirit and substance than I do in a tangible, literal sense.
Modifié par Terror_K, 05 avril 2010 - 07:37 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
