131 réponses à ce sujet

[ImperialOperative]

Very long post, jumped to the end, saw that you didn't bother to write it correctly, didn't read.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Meglivorn wrote...

What is the problem with projectiles? They were cool in Aliens too ...
[/list]

Hudson approves of this post

[Sand King]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Meglivorn wrote...

What is the problem with projectiles? They were cool in Aliens too ...
[/list]

Hudson approves of this post

Bill Paxton approves of both post.

[glacier1701]

MrHimuraChan wrote...

from www.joystiq.com/2010/03/13/bioware-designer-talks-about-goals-for-mass-effect-3/

Joystiq.com wrote...
 What we can probably expect less of, however, is the mining minigame,
which Norman described as the part that "nobody liked."

I approve +100

The only problem is the person in charge of the whole project thinks that the mininga system is addicitive and said that in an interview AFTER Christina made her presentation. In other words there might be change but not the one you expect.

[David Knight]

I really have to agree with Krigwin on this. I'm really glad there are some logical people out there. I'm pretty sure ME2 did amazingly well. The thing about these boards is only complainers post on them.
I'll start with the loading screens. ME 2 covers two disks. Maybe the screens are necessary for loading, hmmm?
ME1 is only considered an RPG b/c of its conversation system. Technically, when you think about the meaning of the term, even Halo is an RPG b/c you're playing a role. In terms of classic RPGs, however, ME is not even close to one. It was never designed to be so. Bioware set out to merge the shooter and RPG genres and did so brilliantly. ME3 can't have more RPG mechanics. What would they be, other than turn the shooter system into a turn-based die-roll system like in KotOR.
The inventory system was crappy. Period. Most people are glad to see it gone. Yes, there could have been more weapons for greater customization and replay value, but beggars can't be choosers. I don't know why people talk about the inventory system like it was great when they were complaining about it two years ago.
The Mako was buggy and it could've stayed, but Bioware chose to do away with it for the Hammerhead. I'm on the fence about the Mako. I kinda liked it and kinda hated it. Regardless, the Mako added nothing to the RPG elements in ME1. Nothing. Why bring it up?
Some people complain about the lack of helmet removal on demand. Really? Come on. There has to be something better to do with your time.
Choices? I suspect everything we have done will matter in ME3. And I agree with some previous posters. There were some big decisions in ME2 (geth, anyone?).
Linear does not automatically mean BAD. Linearity allows for structure and purpose in a story. ME2's story was far superior to ME1 in terms of pacing. It had several missions which had to be completed immediately. This was a nice change and a bit of realism added. In ME1 you could take all the time you wanted to hunt down Saren. Sure, Shepard, the human Spectre who's our only hope. Go look for keepers. Or help the Consort. Or save a kitten. Seesh.
The characters were better and their loyalty missions allowed for a lot of fun roleplaying.
ME2 was a fantastic game and, IMO, far greater than the original. As I said before, I'm pretty sure most agree with my sentiment. However, only those who complain bother to post on the boards. Bioware, keep up the good work!

[SithLordExarKun]

Icinix wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

kraidy1117
wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

You need to get
laid. With a women.

Me?

lol no the OP.

But
we all should have sex to release what ever tension we have with ME2.

This
is quite possibly the most intelligent post I have ever read on these
forums.

HIGH FIVE!!

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 06 mai 2010 - 02:29 .

[RyuGuitarFreak]

biomag wrote...

Krigwin wrote...

Sometimes when I read these threads I feel I have somehow played an entirely different game than the rest of you.

For instance, people complain about the 'loss' of RPG elements from ME1 to ME2. To that I ask, what RPG elements?

The inventory system was a cluttered mess and only an inventory system in name. You get one gun that does X amount of damage, and then the next gun that does X+Y amount of damage! Man, that's some tough customization there. Oh wait, we can't forget about the omni-tools and bio-amps! You get an omni-tool that adds X amount of damage to Overload, and then an even better omni-tool that does, get this, X+Y more damage with Overload!

You cannot honestly be telling me that that's one of the RPG elements you're talking about. Plus, it's not even like they took that out - the inventory menus are still around, as are the weapon progression, there's just a lot less of each gun now and they took out certain item categories. The (quite broken, I might add) gun and armor customization system? They just replaced that with ammo powers, which are far more balanced and make for an actually more strategic game, believe it or not, and changed it so that only Shepard can customize his/her armor.

If you seriously think the inventory system from ME1 was an "RPG element", you need to play more RPGs. Even Dragon Age did a better job with items and equipment. The inventory system from ME1 was nothing more than a linear progression scale dressed up to look like character customization, all ME2 did was make this more obvious.

Then there's the skills system, which, again, ME1 didn't even do that well to begin with. It wasn't like KotOR where character skills actually mattered - the only thing you needed to do was bring someone to unlock stuff (lolsTali), and then stack the medi-gel skill across the party. ME2 streamlined the skills system and made it more intuitive and combat-based, which, again, made for a more balanced and strategic game.

In ME1 characters were hardly unique and it almost didn't matter at all what your party was, speaking in terms of combat (aside from the bringing Tali along all the time for lockpicking things, of course). In ME2, ammo powers, loyalty skills, and defense-piercing skills differentiate each character and make each suitable for different situations. For instance, Tali with Energy Drain and AI Hacking is amazing for Legion's loyalty mission, but useless for, say, Mordin's loyalty mission, where Grunt with Inferno Ammo and his melee attack would be much more useful.

And the last thing people bring up all the time is the big decisions thing, ie the saving the Rachni Queen, killing Shiala or not, etc. Well, again, I must have played a different game than everyone else, because there were multiples of such decisions in each of the loyalty missions I played in ME2, a lot of them actually pretty important as pertaining to the characters' development.


TL;DR: I felt ME2 was a better RPG than ME1 and have no idea what people are talking about when they claim ME1 had more or better RPG elements than ME2, although I will agree both games have a depressing shortage of RPG elements to begin with.

Thanks god there are some sane people around here!

Finally I read a post from a person who understands what RPGs is about and doesn't whine about game mechanics and screams "THAT'S RPG!!!!". Its about ROLE PLAYING and not having 10 combat skills! ME 1 and 2 give you the chance to play your character Shepard. ME 2 is even better at that because some missions are just stories and there are really urgent missions. How many of you didn't start Virmire until they finished the other 3 planets? How many stopped chasing Saren just to get a shot on the paragon/renegade mission? How many finished all side quest during the extremely urgent hunt for Saren and the Conduit?
ME2 story is far better at this point. You can be slow, but there will be punishment. You don't have a story that claims there is no time, but instead tells you your mission is to prepare yourself, so go and gain experience & tech and only then go face your enemy.

Whining about the story is the biggest part of this boards bs. Some people don't understand how this story is build up. First part was the introduction, where you set your univers for the rest of the game (big decisions). Second game is the part were you build up a team and get a chance to know their background. Third will be the big showdown and there you should see the difference of your previous actions.
Also I think some people didn't really pay attention to what happened at ME 2... what about quorians and geth? Didn't you realize that you decide if the quorains start a war and what happens to the rebel geth? Decision as big as the council and rachni queen.

ME 2 is far better when it comes to immersion and role playing. The missions are more real, have more story and aren't just about shooting at things (is there a single ME 1 mission you can finish without shooting? Ah yes, scanning the keepers... wow, what a rpg element, thx god there is no heavy-action part using a kreepy fighting system...). Also people didn't give a damn about the stories of the side missions at ME 2. Yes, some are just go down there and kill, but there were a few small campaigns. Sure, they were just based on killing and most players didn't even follow the story, but I guess ME 1 was there better too... oh look, rachni got deployed on 2 planets, go and kill them... oh, Thorian kreepers on 2 planets, lets kill them,...


People are whining here beyond any logic, just because they had different expectations. The OP even whined about being forced to use specific party members to finish the game... I finished it on insanity, like many others, I didn't replay a single mission just to change my party members because it would have been impossible otherwise. The only party members that are forced, are those for loyalty mission...and guess why...


I ain't saying that ME 2 is perfect or that ME 1 was bad. Its just I think many are just complaining because they don't have better things to do. They are ignoring improvments because they are focused on minor flaws and things that aren't important at all for a RPG, just because "all others" have them. Oblivion needed skills as it had no immersion at all. D&D-games, as bad as this rpg system is, had them because they're based on pen and paper and they need those things to work. This doesn't imply ME 2 isn't a RPG. A good RPG, even a pen&paper lead by a good gamemaster and good players, won't rely heavily on stats and skills, but on characters.

Thank you. Both of you. It's nice seeing more users here that really knows what an rpg really is. Something that people should notice is that the conversation interruption system is a bigger RPG element than all the whatever other stuff ME1 had.
I sighed a little when Christina Norman showed they're gonna change their design because of people complaints about the rpg elements, with the complaints don't really being about roleplaying, but more relying upon stats and skills. Well, I trust Bioware anyway.

[David Knight]

You know, that pretty much sucks. Only complainers post on the boards, Bioware. Don't change your game design based on these forums. Seriously.

Man, I really wish we had more people like Krigwin, Biomag, and GuitarFreak posting. Ugh.

[bjdbwea]

David Knight wrote...

Only complainers post on the boards, Bioware. Don't change your game design based on these forums.

I wish you had told them that before ME 2! Apparently some of the changes were due to endless complaining from the same people who are now complaining about other people complaining.

[Mister Mida]

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

biomag wrote...

Krigwin wrote...

Thank you. Both of you. It's nice seeing more users here that really knows what an rpg really is. Something that people should notice is that the conversation interruption system is a bigger RPG element than all the whatever other stuff ME1 had.
I sighed a little when Christina Norman showed they're gonna change their design because of people complaints about the rpg elements, with the complaints don't really being about roleplaying, but more relying upon stats and skills. Well, I trust Bioware anyway.

Well, we don't know what they are gonna change to the design so who knows how ME3 is gonna turn out. Maybe Bioware will have figured out how to make both critic and supporter happy at the same time.

Modifié par Mister Mida, 06 mai 2010 - 02:55 .

[wolfsite]

David Knight wrote...

You know, that pretty much sucks. Only complainers post on the boards, Bioware. Don't change your game design based on these forums. Seriously.
Man, I really wish we had more people like Krigwin, Biomag, and GuitarFreak posting. Ugh.

Frankly I hope they just do what they want with ME3 and ignore the vast majority of those (when I say majority I mean all) of those who complain.  I have seen other games go to hell cause the developers listen to those complaining and all the complainers do is complain and say they shouldn't have changed it even though they changed it cause they complained about it.  It becomes acycle like a snake trying to eat it's own tail with the end results being rather unpleaseant for the snake.

[Mister Mida]

wolfsite wrote...

David Knight wrote...

You know, that pretty much sucks. Only complainers post on the boards, Bioware. Don't change your game design based on these forums. Seriously.
Man, I really wish we had more people like Krigwin, Biomag, and GuitarFreak posting. Ugh.

Frankly I hope they just do what they want with ME3 and ignore the vast majority of those (when I say majority I mean all) of those who complain.  I have seen other games go to hell cause the developers listen to those complaining and all the complainers do is complain and say they shouldn't have changed it even though they changed it cause they complained about it.  It becomes acycle like a snake trying to eat it's own tail with the end results being rather unpleaseant for the snake.

Are you also referring to the people who complained about what was 'bad' in ME1?

[rastakore]

For ME3 I just want this:

- Stats on weapons. Every damn game nowdays which as some sort of equipment screen has it, and why? Because it's usefull to compare the pros and cons of your equipment without trying them or reading an innacurate discription.

- The same upgrade system from ME2 but with the option to choose what upgrades you want to have in your armor/weapons and instead of having them all on a list, wich it's almost like the inventory from ME1 but you don't have to use it, organize them better in categories or something.

- More powers/stats to level.

- Costumizable armor for squadmates.

- No scanning.

- And more importantly, an epic and compeling story with a grand finale.

Modifié par rastakore, 06 mai 2010 - 03:35 .

[KitsuneRommel]

Meglivorn wrote...

I don't know what did you play... I played insanity with Miranda, Garrus and Tali. Only took other party members when the story dictated me to do so (loyalty quests). And never had any problem.

Miranda has Overload and Warp (vs shields, barriers and armor)
Garrus has Overload and AP ammo (vs shields and armor)

My Adept did ~ 80% of the missions with them.

The only bad thing about Tali is her weapons. She's way too squishy to use the shotgun.

[Jebel Krong]

rastakore wrote...

For ME3 I just want this:

- Stats on weapons. Every damn game nowdays which as some sort of equipment screen has it, and why? Because it's usefull to compare the pros and cons of your equipment without trying them or reading an innacurate discription.

- The same upgrade system from ME2 but with the option to choose what upgrades you want to have in your armor/weapons and instead of having them all on a list, wich it's almost like the inventory from ME1 but you don't have to use it, organize them better in categories or something.

- More powers/stats to level.

- Costumizable armor for squadmates.

- No scanning.

- And more importantly, an epic and compeling story with a grand finale.

- because reading is hard?
- because you don't want the best stuff on your weapons?
- why? there's plenty already, espeially with bonuses.
- no way - unique squaddie outfits are far superior.
- finally something i agree with.
- goes without saying.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Mister Mida wrote...

RyuGuitarFreak wrote...

biomag wrote...

Krigwin wrote...

Thank you. Both of you. It's nice seeing more users here that really knows what an rpg really is. Something that people should notice is that the conversation interruption system is a bigger RPG element than all the whatever other stuff ME1 had.
I sighed a little when Christina Norman showed they're gonna change their design because of people complaints about the rpg elements, with the complaints don't really being about roleplaying, but more relying upon stats and skills. Well, I trust Bioware anyway.

Well, we don't know what they are gonna change to the design so who knows how ME3 is gonna turn out. Maybe Bioware will have figured out how to make both critic and supporter happy at the same time.

Yeah, I expect this. As I said, I trust Bioware. They didn't let me down on ME1, they didn't let me down on ME2.

[tonnactus]

Mister Mida wrote...


Are you also referring to the people who complained about what was 'bad' in ME1?

Yes,those hypocriticals:

Elevators sucks.

Now we have ****ty loading screens.We not even go out of the ship trough the airlock.

Mako sucks.

Now we have boring N7 missions where the player is on the right place immadietly, only shoot things to death.Nothing like Major Kyle for example.Or Unc:Negotiation.

But hey.The enviroment seems to look different.

Modifié par tonnactus, 06 mai 2010 - 04:18 .

[KitsuneRommel]

tonnactus wrote...

Mister Mida wrote...


Are you also referring to the people who complained about what was 'bad' in ME1?

Yes,those hypocriticals:

Elevators sucks.

Now we have ****ty loading screens.We not even go out of the ship trough the airlock.

Mako sucks.

Now we have boring N7 mission where the player is on the right place immadietly, only shoot things to death.Nothing like Major Kyle for example.Or Unc:Negotiation.

But hey.The enviroment seems to look different.

False dilemma. Read about it.

(Besides N7 HAD missions with 0 combat)

[tonnactus]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

Mister Mida wrote...


Are you also referring to the people who complained about what was 'bad' in ME1?

Yes,those hypocriticals:

Elevators sucks.

Now we have ****ty loading screens.We not even go out of the ship trough the airlock.

Mako sucks.

Now we have boring N7 mission where the player is on the right place immadietly, only shoot things to death.Nothing like Major Kyle for example.Or Unc:Negotiation.

But hey.The enviroment seems to look different.

False dilemma. Read about it.

(Besides N7 HAD missions with 0 combat)

There isnt any N7 Mission where you talk with someone.

[TJSolo]

Krigwin wrote...

Sometimes when I read these threads I feel I have somehow played an entirely different game than the rest of you.

You might have been playing a different game because even the lead designer of ME1 and 2 has stated ME2 has less RPG elements. Of course using the term RPG elements is just shorthand to avoid long contrived posts about every aspect of the game.

Modifié par TJSolo, 06 mai 2010 - 04:27 .

[biomag]

tonnactus wrote...

KitsuneRommel wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

Mister Mida wrote...


Are you also referring to the people who complained about what was 'bad' in ME1?

Yes,those hypocriticals:

Elevators sucks.

Now we have ****ty loading screens.We not even go out of the ship trough the airlock.

Mako sucks.

Now we have boring N7 mission where the player is on the right place immadietly, only shoot things to death.Nothing like Major Kyle for example.Or Unc:Negotiation.

But hey.The enviroment seems to look different.

False dilemma. Read about it.

(Besides N7 HAD missions with 0 combat)

There isnt any N7 Mission where you talk with someone.

Oh, please... because you can't compare loyalty missions to N7?... well, if we do it this way:

*whine* ME 1 had far less main-plot missions than ME 2 and non of those could be done without fighting *whine*


Sorry, but that's just complaining for the sake of complaining. N7 missions are like the smallest side quests, like the Marines vs rachni (I, II and III = Cerberus' ship, base one, base two), thorian keeper hunt, the empty ship with a single crazy biotic or full of rachni or full of husks (strangely I never found one full of thorian keepers... ah yes, the mad doc that Garrus hunted down). You talk, get the most basic info, but its not related to the core game. Its just occupational therapy for players. Take a look at how much detail is in each and every of these N7 missions. I am pretty sure they took Bioware more time to develop than any ME 1 side quest. And lets not even start comparing the work for the loyalty missions. They were full of new ideas and had a lot of work put into them. No Mako scouting planets can achieve that level... got I hate Mako-parts right now, as I am replaying ME 1...



As I said, I like ME 1, but the complaining about ME 2 is ridiculous.

Modifié par biomag, 06 mai 2010 - 05:14 .

[KitsuneRommel]

Role-playing elements do not automatically make the game better. If any of you have played the 90s CRPG trilogy Realms of Arkania you know what I mean.

On the advanced setting,
players get to tune their heroes to every minute detail, from the choice
whether a weapon skill upgrade is used for offence or defence, up to
their ability to swim, lie or sense danger.

Creating a hero can become
quite a chore, though. Every class, called archetype, has certain
criteria for minimum stats, and the stats are determined by rolling
virtual dice. More often than not, it'll end up with values that don't
qualify for any class (consulting the manual while distributing the
numbers is obligatory), and there's no choice but to start all over
again. That doesn't only apply to the seven base values, but also the
seven rather unique negative stats, that determine each heroes special
weaknesses.

The party has to rest every
night, take care of food and water, assign guards for the night, etc.
The mountain passes can't be traveled during winter, and not dressing
properly for the season is likely to get someone sick.

Most dungeon crawls will leave
the party in rather poor state. Some members may and will be wounded,
poisoned, sick or even dead, and (most) weapons are not indestructible,
either.


Brings back "fond" memories.

[tonnactus]

biomag wrote...
Take a look at how much detail is in each and every of these N7 missions.

I dont care about the graphic details that are even not as unique as it seems.

[KitsuneRommel]

tonnactus wrote...

biomag wrote...
Take a look at how much detail is in each and every of these N7 missions.

I dont care about the graphic details that are even not as unique as it seems.

A lot more unique than the carbon copy ships/bunkers/mines in ME1. Talk about immersion breaking.

I hope ME3 lands somewhere in the middle of ME1 and 2 with the side quests.

[Mister Mida]

I hope Bioware is gonna listen to Bioware