161 réponses à ce sujet

[kraze07]

They don't just pull those numbers out of their arses. Stats do a fine job of telling gamers all they need to know about weapons without having to read through a full, detailed description. A numerical value is way more convient than having a whole paragraph or what not of information to read just to tell you how one weapon compares to another.

[Helljumper55]

KitsuneRommel wrote...



ME1 is not a shooter. Really.

Whoah... I should of took singularity!

[2A92 Legion]

We want it back.

[Sigma Tauri]

kraze07 wrote...

They don't just pull those numbers out of their arses. Stats do a fine job of telling gamers all they need to know about weapons without having to read through a full, detailed description. A numerical value is way more convient than having a whole paragraph or what not of information to read just to tell you how one weapon compares to another.

Agreed. A full, detailed description for immersion's sake? That's a sucky idea. Stats in inventories are helpful because the most important information to the player is if attributes go up and down. Players in general only really care about how their developing character's stats trends. They couldn't get that type of useful comparative information from paragraph descriptions. But, I wouldn't want stats to be overly complex. Fewer stats that when manipulated have signfiicant effects are more useful.

[Kangasniemi]

kraze07 wrote...

They don't just pull those numbers out of their arses. Stats do a fine job of telling gamers all they need to know about weapons without having to read through a full, detailed description. A numerical value is way more convient than having a whole paragraph or what not of information to read just to tell you how one weapon compares to another.

Well that will indeed make the game more and more a Gears of War clone. Because what you actually are saying is "**** the story and immersion, just give me big numbers in my gunz so I can go back to the 'sploshuns 'n pew pew pew!"

[Helljumper55]

Kangasniemi wrote...

kraze07 wrote...

They don't just pull those numbers out of their arses. Stats do a fine job of telling gamers all they need to know about weapons without having to read through a full, detailed description. A numerical value is way more convient than having a whole paragraph or what not of information to read just to tell you how one weapon compares to another.

Well that will indeed make the game more and more a Gears of War clone. Because what you actually are saying is "**** the story and immersion, just give me big numbers in my gunz so I can go back to the 'sploshuns 'n pew pew pew!"

Hey, if what you mean by immersion is to get into the game's story, then couldn't the numbers be okay? I mean, how does it exactly affect the realism or the story at all? Someone posted the specs of the Colt M4 carbine before. now it does not say it has a specific DPS value, but couldn't that be the game equivilent of saying it is a 5.56mm rifle? I just am having trouble understanding your arguement is all. 

Modifié par Helljumper55, 20 mai 2010 - 07:00 .

[CatatonicMan]

Helljumper55 wrote...

 Someone posted the specs of the Colt M4 carbine before. now it does not say it has a specific DPS value, but couldn't that be the game equivilent of saying it is a 5.56mm rifle?

That's what it basically is, yes. Real life specs are not that useful in-game, so they are replaced by equivalent statistics that have meaning within the context of the game.

More to the point, not having them would be like not being able to look up the statistics on the internet and/or use experimentation to find them. It's far less realistic to know essentially nothing about a weapon than to know the game analogs of real information.

Modifié par CatatonicMan, 20 mai 2010 - 10:54 .

[Shotokanguy]

Terror_K wrote...

Kangasniemi wrote...

Having crapload of numerical values which should not be known by the character you are playing (a DPS for a weapon, what the ****) shown to player is the most disastreous way to kill immersion in a game. Sure it's fun for the no-life min-maxers of the game who get their kicks by having a gun that has 0,0000000001 DPS better than some other gun.

All the info you should get from a gun, in numerical form, is rate of fire, clip size, effective range and accurasy (in MOA). Other info (for example if the gun is really effective against shields) should be only in written description.

Giving player some bull**** info that the character he is playing would never have is just idiotic.

Couldn't disagree more. This is supposed to be an RPG, not a straight shooter. Go back to your Halo or Gears of War if that's what you're after. Its shooter fanboys like you that are the reason games lately are getting dumbed down and that we can't have nice things.

Ugh, posts like that ****** me off so much. I can't even find words. We're talking about video games, dork. Get over yourself.

I should say though, that picture of that orange menu with all kinds of stats? Horrible. If that was jammed into Mass Effect I'd freak out.

Edit: Great, I've only skimmed the last couple pages but it looks like I'm inviting the very people I disagree with. Did I actually see someone say Mass Effect's combat isn't broken? And thinks the only reason his friend said is because he was a mindless, inferior FPS player?

All of you who think Mass Effect 2 is a FPS, get out please.

Modifié par Shotokanguy, 20 mai 2010 - 11:06 .

[CatatonicMan]

Shotokanguy wrote...

All of you who think Mass Effect 2 is a FPS, get out please.

Mass Effect 2? An FPS? That's silly.

It's clearly a TPS.

[Kangasniemi]

CatatonicMan wrote...

Helljumper55 wrote...

 Someone posted the specs of the Colt M4 carbine before. now it does not say it has a specific DPS value, but couldn't that be the game equivilent of saying it is a 5.56mm rifle?

That's what it basically is, yes. Real life specs are not that useful in-game, so they are replaced by equivalent statistics that have meaning within the context of the game.

More to the point, not having them would be like not being able to look up the statistics on the internet and/or use experimentation to find them. It's far less realistic to know essentially nothing about a weapon than to know the game analogs of real information.

Having some numerical values is understandable, like I've already said in this very thread, but having a gun that has 20 different numerical values listed and total of ONE line of description of the weapon isn't what I call good game desing. And most of those values are just made up values (that are used in game mechanics) that the player character would not know, or he would have to calculate them. And reducing the choise of an item just down to "bigger number is better" makes the whole invetory system a waste of code lines.

For example the DPS, that I despice, is a value that should be never shown to player. That is for ADD kids who can't keep their consentration for 10 secs to read some description of the item. In theory it could be calculated from guns by dividing damage by rate of fire but it still is a stupid value to give to a player and it would have  very little to do with the caliber of the gun. But what the **** is wrong with people who give it on melee weapons?

At the end what I want is a system that emphasis more on the written description of an item than just a exel sheet of numbers. That way all the items would feel like something special, not just some crap created by a random item generator. The way ME2 does this is nearly perfect. The guns have descriptions on them but no spread sheets of numbers.

Or if you really want to make **** load of random items, do it like Diablo, Borderlands or Torchlight. They are all awesome games but none of them is an PRG.

[noobzor99]

Kangasniemi wrote...
And reducing the choise of an item just down to "bigger number is better" makes the whole invetory system a waste of code lines.

Except that the weapons aren't just DPS... they also have accuracy, ROF, magazine size...

I for one would love to see the actual stats for my weapons in addition to what is already there.

[CatatonicMan]

Kangasniemi wrote...

Or if you really want to make **** load of random items, do it like Diablo, Borderlands or Torchlight. They are all awesome games but none of them is an PRG.

Technically they are, actually. Action RPG's, to be sure, but still RPGs. The RPG genre is very broad, indeed.

[Kangasniemi]

CatatonicMan wrote...

Kangasniemi wrote...

Or if you really want to make **** load of random items, do it like Diablo, Borderlands or Torchlight. They are all awesome games but none of them is an PRG.

Technically they are, actually. Action RPG's, to be sure, but still RPGs. The RPG genre is very broad, indeed.

By that definition GTA, FarCry2, Half-Life and even the strategy game series Total War are all RPGs. Hell even most racing games can be considered RPGs by that view.

Diablo, Torchlight are hack 'n slash dungeon crawlers. Borderlands is an FPS with a million guns.

[Helljumper55]

Kangasniemi wrote...

CatatonicMan wrote...

Helljumper55 wrote...

 Someone posted the specs of the Colt M4 carbine before. now it does not say it has a specific DPS value, but couldn't that be the game equivilent of saying it is a 5.56mm rifle?

That's what it basically is, yes. Real life specs are not that useful in-game, so they are replaced by equivalent statistics that have meaning within the context of the game.

More to the point, not having them would be like not being able to look up the statistics on the internet and/or use experimentation to find them. It's far less realistic to know essentially nothing about a weapon than to know the game analogs of real information.

Having some numerical values is understandable, like I've already said in this very thread, but having a gun that has 20 different numerical values listed and total of ONE line of description of the weapon isn't what I call good game desing. And most of those values are just made up values (that are used in game mechanics) that the player character would not know, or he would have to calculate them. And reducing the choise of an item just down to "bigger number is better" makes the whole invetory system a waste of code lines.

For example the DPS, that I despice, is a value that should be never shown to player. That is for ADD kids who can't keep their consentration for 10 secs to read some description of the item. In theory it could be calculated from guns by dividing damage by rate of fire but it still is a stupid value to give to a player and it would have  very little to do with the caliber of the gun. But what the **** is wrong with people who give it on melee weapons?

At the end what I want is a system that emphasis more on the written description of an item than just a exel sheet of numbers. That way all the items would feel like something special, not just some crap created by a random item generator. The way ME2 does this is nearly perfect. The guns have descriptions on them but no spread sheets of numbers.

Or if you really want to make **** load of random items, do it like Diablo, Borderlands or Torchlight. They are all awesome games but none of them is an PRG.

Actually i think the Damage per shot would greatly depend on the Caliber of the round. A .45 is a larger bullet with a larger grain count of black powder compared to, say, the 9mm; it gives it more stopping power. I actually do not recall ever seeing a DPS in-game. This may be because I play on the xbox 360 (It is only recently that I posses a PC that is capable of running high quality games) but I only recall ever seeing a plain damage value. but I still think that displaying the values would benifit the player, not hinder his gaming experience. 

Modifié par Helljumper55, 21 mai 2010 - 03:12 .

[kraze07]

Kangasniemi wrote...

CatatonicMan wrote...

Kangasniemi wrote...

Or if you really want to make **** load of random items, do it like Diablo, Borderlands or Torchlight. They are all awesome games but none of them is an PRG.

Technically they are, actually. Action RPG's, to be sure, but still RPGs. The RPG genre is very broad, indeed.

By that definition GTA, FarCry2, Half-Life and even the strategy game series Total War are all RPGs. Hell even most racing games can be considered RPGs by that view.

Diablo, Torchlight are hack 'n slash dungeon crawlers. Borderlands is an FPS with a million guns.

I fail to see how they would be considered RPGs. Role-playing games and games that involve playing a role are two different things.

[Terror_K]

Kangasniemi wrote...

Or if you really want to make **** load of random items, do it like Diablo, Borderlands or Torchlight. They are all awesome games but none of them is an PRG.

Uh... yes they are. They actually do a better job of being an RPG than ME2 does. They all have leveling up, skills you invest points in, and items with stats on them. They're RPG's. Action RPG's, but still RPG's. They've always been officially considered RPG's and generally accepted as them.

As for the "text vs. stats" arguement, the text as in ME2 is almost meaningless. If I have a half a dozen similar weapons to choose from that all have a vague blurb that say "good at damage, weak at shield and armour bypass" how the hell am I supposed to know which one does the most damage or has the best bypass or has the most accuracy without stats to compare with? A blurb isn't enough information for that, and the only reason ME2 "gets away" with it is because the amount of items is so pathetic that it doesn't matter. ME1 had stats on its weapons, and 90% of RPGs do. Heck, even some shooters and action games do. ME2's method is pathetic and dumbed-down; its basically just a shooter system slapped into an RPG.

[Ecael]

Pokémon is more RPG than either Mass Effect.

EDIT: (It's also the best-selling RPG of all time. Of all time!)

Modifié par Ecael, 21 mai 2010 - 05:50 .

[Massadonious1]

Having a RPG element for the sake of a RPG element is ridiculous and self serving. If you're going to have stats, they have to mean something.

In ME1, lets say you found a gun that did 50 or more damage than your current weapon does. The shots before overheat are relatively even, and the only thing lower than your current weapon is the accuracy, by about 10 points or so. In reality, which weapon are you going to choose? Did anyone really notice a tangible difference in "accuracy" from something that was 10 points off, or even 20 or 30 points off, especially if you were investing points in that type of weapon?

As much as I love Borderlands, it runs into a similar problem. I honestly can't tell the difference between a 3x zoom and a 4x zoom. I'm running into class mods with pluses in skills I didn't even know I had, and I used a level 19 epic combat shotgun for 14 levels. I would probably be using it to this day if I didn't find a legendary with a ridiculous elemental level in a dumpster, of all things.

Stats are fine when they work, especially in MMO's and games like Dragon Age. There is a tangible difference between 50 strength and 40 strength, and different elemental pluses, especially if enemies have specific resistances to them. But, adding arbitrary stats just so they can look nice and shiny when you compare it to another item is unecessary. In that case, it's better just to simplify things, regardless of wether it would be considered a RPG mechanic at that point.

Modifié par Massadonious1, 21 mai 2010 - 07:43 .

[Shotokanguy]

Yes, that's a problem the first game had to a ridiculous degree. I never could tell how much damage my armor was resisting...although I do want armor to go back to doing that in ME3 instead of being some arbitrary health bar that shields enemies from powers they shouldn't be shielded from.



But anyway, yes, BioWare should look at that as a chance to do something different. Represent accuracy on the stats screen with different crosshair sizes for each situation (crouching, standing, walking, running,), represent damage with some kind of illustration showing how fast the projectiles are fired from each weapon. After all, more speed = more damage. I dunno, this is hard. Everything concerning the ME series is complicated because of what they're trying to do...combine the best shooter experience with rules and systems working in the background seamlessly to allow a well built character to defeat enemies. Like an RPG. Because that's all RPGs are...numbers! Right, RPG elitists?

[Onyx Jaguar]

Everything comes down to numbers anyway.



I could deconstruct Gears of War, MLB The Show, Deadly Premonition, Beautiful Katamari and anything into a numbers formula in regards to its mechanics. It is what is presented to the player is what is important, however I would say that some RPG purists would prefer a bit more randomness in regards to how the numbers work. So in essence the shooter fans see a bunch of stats that do not mean a whole lot while the RPG purist sees the chance to fail and the chance to succeed. Its sort of a difference between someone trained in hand eye coordination and someone trained in problem solving. They both come to the same conclusions, but hiding one aspect can cause problems for either side.

[Lumikki]

It's pointless argue about what is RGP and what's not. Mostly because it's everyones personal taste what someone think is RPG.

RPG part in ME2 was very limited, but only because the character development and customising side. Everyting else was allmost exact same in ME2 as it was in ME1. Developers simplified and changed the character development side alot. Too much for taste of pure-RPG fans. People are leting they dispoinment affect they judgement what it really is.

So, Inventory is NOT the main cause of the problem. It's the character development, what has two parts.

1. Customise you character abilities, like stats or skills.(In ME case powers, skills)
2. Collect "items" what allows customise the character. (In ME case weapons and armors)

If player has multible character, then it also means customise all of those characters. What was changed between ME1 and ME2 was the amount of customation what player could do for her/his characters, this includes squad members.

If You really ask inventory back, then my answer is HELL NO. If you ask to give the character development back to it greatness as ability customise, then HELL YES. The character development side was too simplifyed in ME2 when comparing it to ME1. If we are honest, it was very simple even in ME1, compared to true pure RPG. How ever don't get me wrong, both ME's are still RPG's.

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 mai 2010 - 08:16 .

[Terror_K]

Just because the items were broken in ME1 doesn't mean they need to be broken in a future ME game if they went back to using the same basic system. People need to stop thinking that the only alternative to oversimplification in regards to ME2's items is to go back to ME1's ones. Things aren't so black and white, and its possibly to come up with a system that works. For the most part the Mass Effect system was okay, it was the items themselves that needed work. The element isn't there just for the sake of it, it's there to illustrate the difference between the guns in a visible and tangible way. The way it is now is vague and inadequate, but again, gets away with it because its reduced the items so much and dumbed them down to a shooter-based system.

[LPPrince]

 I wanted to keep this short, but screw it-

Mass Effect's inventory was flawed.

We asked for it to be improved upon.

Instead, it got completely scrapped.

DO NOT WANT.

What I do want is an inventory system that works.

By Inventory system, I mean a list of things I own, that I can customize, with details in both words and numbers of their strengths and weaknesses.

I want to buy, trade, and sell these items to vendors, and actually be able to customize my own weapon.

Bioware hyped up how customizing our weapons would make them feel like our "very own" weapon.

That didn't turn out true at all.

Rather, I want a combination of what we had and what we have-

AMMO-
I want ammo removed as a power. Rather, I want it to be separate, where if you pop up the power wheel and select Shepard, it'll list a bunch of different ammo types you have on your person above the abilities you can use. Then choose one and continue(or of course, set it to a button to quick play).
This way, we could have-

Inferno Ammo(Burns through armor)
Disruptor Ammo(Cuts through shields)
Warp Ammo(Warps through barriers)
High Explosive Ammo(Chance of knocking enemies back)
Toxic Ammo(Prevents health regeneration)
Cryo Ammo(Immobilizes targets)

That way, one isn't necessarily better than the other, and everyone can switch between multiple ammo types, leaving more space for abilities.

UPGRADES-
I want upgrades to the ship, weapons, abilities, and the like to be basically as they were in ME2, but with more specific info on just how much they improve what we have.
Not looking for, "+25% armor piercing".
Looking for, "Blah blah blah blah blah, this is why this improves armor piercing capabilities" and then showing how much it is actually improved with a bar(Terror_K's image comes to mind), with some numbers to compliment them.

WEAPONS-
We need more weapons. I felt the lack of weapons disturbing, as it never felt like there was much to choose from, unlike in ME1. It was flawed then, but its still flawed now.
I want to see something like this, using assault rifles as an example-

RPS=Rounds per sink, AC= Ammo Capacity, DPS=Damage per shot, Effective range, Type of fire(all the following is theoretical)

Avenger Assault Rifle(40 rps, 400 ac, 40 dps, 200-500 yds, Automatic)
Collector Assault Rifle(28 rps, 280 ac, 30 dps, 200-1000 yds, Automatic)
Revenant Machine Gun(80 rps, 500 ac, 60 dps, 100-300 yds, Automatic)
Vindicator Battle Rifle(24 rps, 96 ac, 80 dps, 500-1000 yds, 3 rd Burst)
Spectre Assault Rifle(50 rps, 300 ac, 70 dps, 300-800 yds, Single fire/5 rd Burst/Automatic)

etc etc with more and more choices, none being particularly better than the others(with maybe the Spectre weapons as an exception), due to damage drop offs with range, the type of fire the weapon uses, etc

The point is, inventory needs to EXIST in ME3. Doesn't have to be exactly the way I put it, but if Bioware can find a way to do it RIGHT, and actually take the ME1 system and CORRECT it, then we're all good.

But don't just throw it away.

Modifié par LPPrince, 21 mai 2010 - 11:00 .

[Lumikki]

LPPrince wrote...

AMMO-
I want ammo removed as a power.
Rather, I want it to be separate, where if you pop up the power wheel and select Shepard, it'll list a bunch of different ammo types you have on your person above the abilities you can use. Then choose one and
continue(or of course, set it to a button to quick play).
This way, we could have-

Inferno Ammo(Burns through armor)
Disruptor Ammo(Cuts through shields)
Warp Ammo(Warps through barriers)
High Explosive Ammo(Chance of knocking enemies back)
Toxic Ammo(Prevents health regeneration)
Cryo Ammo(Immobilizes targets)

That way, one isn't necessarily better than the other, and everyone can switch between multiple ammo types, leaving more space for abilities..

I agree this one fully, the power design wasn't done right when dealing ammos.


How ever, can someone explain to me what hell is good on big long inventory list?

I want to customise, select, modify and upgrade. I don't need some damm long inventory list what I own for that. What is needed.

Weapon selection screen, ability select weapon what characters gonna use, from SMALL LIST.
Weapon selection screen, ability select different ammos from SMALL LIST to weapons used.
Weapon selection screen, ability select different modification to weapon from SMALL LIST.
Armor selection screen, ability select different armors what character is gonna wear from SMALL LIST.
Armor selection screen, ability customise the selected armour with colors and paterns from SMALL LIST.
Armor selection screen, ability modify armors abilitties with parts from SMALL LIST.

All above for all squad members and players own character.

Reasearch screen, where player can deside what area of technology player is gonna be researched as upgrades.

Now the SMALL LIST means here about 5-15 different options and only items what are related to selection. There is no need to have some huge list, where is listed everyting what character has. That's just stupid way to handle things. What is in the SMALL LIST, depence what player have found or buyed or researched.

Upgrades are like player is designing to improve something. Few examples: Heavy pistol damage, sniper riffle accuracy, submachine guns fire rate, omni-tools efficient, Normandy's shield strenght, characters ammo carry capacity and so on and so on..

It's not about having inventory list, it's about haveing ability customise.

Basicly what ME2 did do was that there was no more junk items. They where turned directly to money. Of course it could have also handled as, let say: Shepard you fould junk item woth of 2000 credit. Now in ME2 it was directly credit and in ME1 it was induvidual items in you inventory. Both ends in same result, player gonna sell the junk items sooner or later. Was ME2 better, in some ways sure, but maybe little too fast. They could have allowed players to collect junk as junk and then sell them in one click in shops. As junk, I don't mean having list of items, but like Shepard has collected junk items worth of 12350 credit. Want to sell them?

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 mai 2010 - 12:11 .