87 réponses à ce sujet

[BellatrixLugosi]

blah blah blah

[Corehaven22]

Ive never really noticed it. Guess Im not that observant.



I can also add I dont friggin care. ME 2 is a good game. Its has some problems as well. But of all the problems it has this is one I honestly could care the least about. Bullets seem to work fine as far as Im concerned. Works for me.

[BellatrixLugosi]

Corehaven22 wrote...

Ive never really noticed it. Guess Im not that observant.

I can also add I dont friggin care. ME 2 is a good game. Its has some problems as well. But of all the problems it has this is one I honestly could care the least about. Bullets seem to work fine as far as Im concerned. Works for me.

<3<3<3<3<3

[TJSolo]

Well tracers being special coated bullets makes it less of a comparison to firing particles of an ammo block from a ME weapon. Very few soldiers use tracers as their main ammunition..

The only applicable reasoning behind the visual bullets in ME2 is for another layer of hand-holding to help people that have bad aim, as if auto-aim and the mostly immobile target gallery is not enough.



It was done for visual pretty aspect , to aid bad aim, or some combination of the two.

[BellatrixLugosi]

your not getting the point of tracers in this convo, compare speeds with me2 and real life bullet speeds and there is not much of a difference

[askanec]

Since it's dangerous in ME2 to be caught without cover or out of cover, the tracers are a visual cue to help players know when it's safe to poke up to take shots at the enemy. I agree there's a certain amount of hand-holding, there's no denying it.



There's no logical reason why enemies would want to give you cues on when it's safe to leave cover, so this is just done for the sake of gameplay. This is done so rpg gamers who usually don't play shooters can get to enjoy the game too.

[Admoniter]

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

your not getting the point of tracers in this convo, compare speeds with me2 and real life bullet speeds and there is not much of a difference

And there in lies the problem.

In ME1 we had weapons that while not very diverse actually functioned like the gauss rifles that were powered by a wizard.

In ME2 we mine as well have run out of element zero and just arbitraily switched back to chemical propelled weapons. And while they were more diverse they mine as well have just been skins disguising the fact that we are actually using crappy 21st century weapons.

[AsheraII]

1) It looks nicer
2) It helps aiming around corners
3) It's just a game, join the army or work at some physics laboratory if you're that tight about realism (in a sci-fi game, ffs  )

[BellatrixLugosi]

Admoniter wrote...

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

your not getting the point of tracers in this convo, compare speeds with me2 and real life bullet speeds and there is not much of a difference

And there in lies the problem.

In ME1 we had weapons that while not very diverse actually functioned like the gauss rifles that were powered by a wizard.

In ME2 we mine as well have run out of element zero and just arbitraily switched back to chemical propelled weapons. And while they were more diverse they mine as well have just been skins disguising the fact that we are actually using crappy 21st century weapons.

Yup in me1 they went twice as fast, still they are complaining about me2 guns being subsonic which they are not, and about them being slow which they are not

[Admoniter]

BellatrixLugosi wrote...
Yup in me1 they went twice as fast, still they are complaining about me2 guns being subsonic which they are not, and about them being slow which they are not

But compared to ME1 the guns are slow. Now some people like to throw around the whole its a step backwards technology wise when talking about thermal clips (I don't particularly subsribe to this point of view). However, no one can argue that going from a hitscan weapon to a weapon whose projectiles are as slow as molasses is a massive leap backwards.

[BellatrixLugosi]

Admoniter wrote...

BellatrixLugosi wrote...
Yup in me1 they went twice as fast, still they are complaining about me2 guns being subsonic which they are not, and about them being slow which they are not

But compared to ME1 the guns are slow. Now some people like to throw around the whole its a step backwards technology wise when talking about thermal clips (I don't particularly subsribe to this point of view). However, no one can argue that going from a hitscan weapon to a weapon whose projectiles are as slow as molasses is a massive leap backwards.

no more like the difference between a Ferrari F1 racer to the Arrows F1 Racer

[TJSolo]

AsheraII wrote...

1) It looks nicer
2) It helps aiming around corners
3) It's just a game, join the army or work at some physics laboratory if you're that tight about realism (in a sci-fi game, ffs  )

Points one and two were already covered. Seems Bioware thinks the new markets they went after need more pretty flickering lights for stimulus and added aim assistance.
Point three is silly since ME1 and other game already set a precedence on visual bullet speed. The retcon known as ME2 took some step backs implementing the visual pew pew.

[FlyingWalrus]

Admoniter wrote...

BellatrixLugosi wrote...
Yup in me1 they went twice as fast, still they are complaining about me2 guns being subsonic which they are not, and about them being slow which they are not

But compared to ME1 the guns are slow. Now some people like to throw around the whole its a step backwards technology wise when talking...

No they're not.

[Admoniter]

BellatrixLugosi wrote...
no more like the difference between a Ferrari F1 racer to the Arrows F1 Racer

Fair enough, I would contest that the difference between the speeds is more along the lines of a sedan bult in Soviet Russian and a Bugatti Veyron (but different strokes for different folks).

Still there is a diffference and I would say that it is a negative difference. TBH I would rather go back to the "I Win" button that was ME1 weapons (ridiculous cooling mechanic and all) if I got back the hitscan. Otherwise it doesn't really feel like I'm using a mass accelerator and more like I'm using a dressed up Ak-47 that is desperately trying to belong but is terrified it will be made for the fraud that it is.

FlyingWalrus wrote...
No they're not.

Lets see here:

ME1 - Projectile hit where your reticle is.

ME2 - The projectile takes time to travel to what it is aimed at.

Seems like it's slower to me. Sure the difference may not be massive but slower is still slower.

Modifié par Admoniter, 19 avril 2010 - 06:34 .

[BellatrixLugosi]

I like the guns better in me2 but I can see your point you like the instant hits(gauss type) of firing, i just dont want to hear anymore of this subsonic bs.

[exxxed]

askanec wrote...

Since it's dangerous in ME2 to be caught without cover or out of cover, the tracers are a visual cue to help players know when it's safe to poke up to take shots at the enemy. I agree there's a certain amount of hand-holding, there's no denying it.
.

 Your point would have been valid for a First Person Shooter game, where you actually can't see over the cover without peaking, since we already have the over the shoulder view you can clearly see when the enemy is shooting.

 And how does it help you aim better? What's the crosshair for? 
 
 It's not like the bullets are affected by the environment (wind weather etc.), at least in ME 1 you had that head bobbing/swaying while using a sniper rifle.

 Cheers!

[Admoniter]

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

I like the guns better in me2 but I can see your point you like the instant hits(gauss type) of firing, i just dont want to hear anymore of this subsonic bs.

Oh, don't get me wrong, overall I much prefer the weapons of ME2. However, evertime I play theres that little voice in the back of my head that keeps screaming  "what military organization worth its salt would switch to what is arguably a subpar weapon when compared to its previous version that existed 2 years ago."

[BellatrixLugosi]

I just attributed it to something to do with they fact they had to change the way of weapon delivery because of the heat sinks and nodded my head, and called it thats that

[Admoniter]

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

I just attributed it to something to do with they fact they had to change the way of weapon delivery because of the heat sinks and nodded my head, and called it thats that

Thats what I thought but I assumed with the invention of thermal clips that weapons would be capable of firing rounds much faster. I figured that rounds could do more damage and travel faster because with thermal clips you could disperse amounts of heat that would have prievously rendered a weapon a molten pile of slag. Apparently I know absolutely nothing about how technology works in ME.

[BellatrixLugosi]

Admoniter wrote...

BellatrixLugosi wrote...

I just attributed it to something to do with they fact they had to change the way of weapon delivery because of the heat sinks and nodded my head, and called it thats that

Thats what I thought but I assumed with the invention of thermal clips that weapons would be capable of firing rounds much faster. I figured that rounds could do more damage and travel faster because with thermal clips you could disperse amounts of heat that would have prievously rendered a weapon a molten pile of slag. Apparently I know absolutely nothing about how technology works in ME.

Of course you know how
How? WHY WITH SCIENCE!!!

[Admoniter]

BellatrixLugosi wrote...
Of course you know how
How? WHY WITH SCIENCE!!!

Or my personal favorite...

Element Zero did it!

[BellatrixLugosi]

you have to admit seeing bullets is cool

[askanec]

exxxed wrote...

askanec wrote...

Since it's dangerous in ME2 to be caught without cover or out of cover, the tracers are a visual cue to help players know when it's safe to poke up to take shots at the enemy. I agree there's a certain amount of hand-holding, there's no denying it.
.

 Your point would have been valid for a First Person Shooter game, where you actually can't see over the cover without peaking, since we already have the over the shoulder view you can clearly see when the enemy is shooting.

 And how does it help you aim better? What's the crosshair for? 
 
 It's not like the bullets are affected by the environment (wind weather etc.), at least in ME 1 you had that head bobbing/swaying while using a sniper rifle.

 Cheers!

You can see when the enemy is shooting, but do you know who the enemy is shooting? Once you have multiple enemies all shooting away at the same time, how would you know who is shooting at who and when it's safe to make a run for the next cover? The visual cues help you make informed decisions, instead of relying on luck, quick reflexes and good hand-eye coordination. This is reminiscent of other Bioware's RPGs which let players pause the action, take stock of the situation and decide on an action plan. I know some people will just approach ME2 like another shooter though.

I never said it helps you aim better, so I'm not sure where you got that from.

[exxxed]

askanec wrote...

exxxed wrote...

askanec wrote...

Since it's dangerous in ME2 to be caught without cover or out of cover, the tracers are a visual cue to help players know when it's safe to poke up to take shots at the enemy. I agree there's a certain amount of hand-holding, there's no denying it.
.

 Your point would have been valid for a First Person Shooter game, where you actually can't see over the cover without peaking, since we already have the over the shoulder view you can clearly see when the enemy is shooting.

 And how does it help you aim better? What's the crosshair for? 
 
 It's not like the bullets are affected by the environment (wind weather etc.), at least in ME 1 you had that head bobbing/swaying while using a sniper rifle.

 Cheers!

You can see when the enemy is shooting, but do you know who the enemy is shooting? Once you have multiple enemies all shooting away at the same time, how would you know who is shooting at who and when it's safe to make a run for the next cover? The visual cues help you make informed decisions, instead of relying on luck, quick reflexes and good hand-eye coordination. This is reminiscent of other Bioware's RPGs which let players pause the action, take stock of the situation and decide on an action plan. I know some people will just approach ME2 like another shooter though.

I never said it helps you aim better, so I'm not sure where you got that from.

 The second and third lines refer to the other dumb posts in this thread, sorry that i didn't mention it.

 As for your reply, you CAN actually pause the game and look around to make decisions based on your strategy , and come on , don't tell me you actually looked at the bullet trajectory to realize that you're actually fired upon, the best way is to look at the bullet impact on your cover, it's much more logical.

 Anyway, the enemies shoot at you, regardless at who they're aiming, if you get up and move around and/or shoot.

 For me it actually looks more as a flashy, cheap Hollywood effect, it was better done in ME 1 where you couldn't see the trajectory but the impact points varied on the quality of the weapon and/or character skill and stance (i.e, running and gunning, crouch etc.).

  Take care!

[TJSolo]

askanec wrote...

exxxed wrote...

askanec wrote...

Since it's dangerous in ME2 to be caught without cover or out of cover, the tracers are a visual cue to help players know when it's safe to poke up to take shots at the enemy. I agree there's a certain amount of hand-holding, there's no denying it.
.

 Your point would have been valid for a First Person Shooter game, where you actually can't see over the cover without peaking, since we already have the over the shoulder view you can clearly see when the enemy is shooting.

 And how does it help you aim better? What's the crosshair for? 
 
 It's not like the bullets are affected by the environment (wind weather etc.), at least in ME 1 you had that head bobbing/swaying while using a sniper rifle.

 Cheers!

You can see when the enemy is shooting, but do you know who the enemy is shooting? Once you have multiple enemies all shooting away at the same time, how would you know who is shooting at who and when it's safe to make a run for the next cover? The visual cues help you make informed decisions, instead of relying on luck, quick reflexes and good hand-eye coordination. This is reminiscent of other Bioware's RPGs which let players pause the action, take stock of the situation and decide on an action plan. I know some people will just approach ME2 like another shooter though.

I never said it helps you aim better, so I'm not sure where you got that from.

Who the enemy is shooting is what a good HUD is for. Not that knowing who is getting shot at in ME2 matters, since the team folds like wet paper bags and will do what they want as far as how long they stay in or out of cover to shoot back.
The over the shoulder view point is the main factor for people to know when and where they should leave cover and fight back, not the light show of bullets.
Visual bullets is not stock Bioware style that helps with the pause action way of combat, that would be ME1. The bullets there were not snails flying around.

Someone wanted to bring up the fact that modern warfare does have tracer rounds. The benefit from them would be aim correction, group aim coordination, and a warning about low ammo. The visual rounds in ME2 are constant; so it is not about low ammo. Firing your visual rounds is not enough to coordinate the team on a target, a seperate keypress does that. Which leaves aim correction as being the last functional reason behind visual bullets.

Of course the non-functional reason of being pretty could also be a factor in why they are in ME2.