887 réponses à ce sujet

[Pocketgb]

[quote]Terror_K wrote...
There are plenty of good solutions and suggestions out there from fans on this board, most of which also have a lot of support from the people on this board. All BioWare needs to do is adopt them. They're essentially getting free ideas thrown at them from the people they're supposedly making this game for.[/quote]

That's essentially what ME2 was: A result of 'fans' needs'. I can't say it was a success since the game didn't increase in depth, but nor can I say it was a failure. A lot of people really loved ME2.

And I can't say that following all the "good suggestions" will solve everything. Guild Wars has tried this for years and it's still a huge mess.

[quote]Terror_K wrote...
It's up to them whether they actually take the suggestions aboard or simply keep thinking their game is practically perfect in every way and snob us all.(which, unfortunately, seems to be their style lately).

Not everyone hated ME2, not everyone is disagreeing with DA2's direction. Just because a forum can be a bit negative doesn't mean the entire fanbase is pissed.

[tonnactus]

Max Legend wrote...







My main complaint about the sentinel in ME1 was the similarity of some of his skills(overload and sabotage dont make quite a difference) and some pointless ones(damn you neural shock,stasis is better).






Actually that's damping,a engineer exclusve skill.


Also both overload and sabotage do shield damage.

That is wrong.Sabotage overheated weapons.Look at the wikia if you dont believe me.Damping increased the cooldown times of tech and biotic enemies.Completly different.
And then,infiltrators had damping too.

Modifié par tonnactus, 12 août 2010 - 09:19 .

[tonnactus]

catabuca wrote...

I think powers/talents do some things better in ME2, like you can actually see the effect they're having on your target more accurately than in ME1, and the ability to arc them is great.

Ai-hacking: In MAss Effect,the hacked enemie has a orange colour so the player could differ them from the regular geth.Now,the hacked geth get additional shields that look the same then ones of the none hacked geth.Better solution?
And how could shields and armor protect from hacking.At least,the geth communicate in combat with each other despite of shields...
Curving biotic powers isnt a improvement then rather a fix to their limited range.All i have to do with throw and lift in Mass Effect was to aim them at the ground.That sucked enemies out of cover without the need to use  singularity.

What are the powers the players couldnt see the effect in MAss Effect?

[Vena_86]

Pocketgb wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
There are plenty of good solutions and suggestions out there from fans on this board, most of which also have a lot of support from the people on this board. All BioWare needs to do is adopt them. They're essentially getting free ideas thrown at them from the people they're supposedly making this game for.

That's essentially what ME2 was: A result of 'fans' needs'. I can't say it was a success since the game didn't increase in depth, but nor can I say it was a failure. A lot of people really loved ME2.

And I can't say that following all the "good suggestions" will solve everything. Guild Wars has tried this for years and it's still a huge mess.

BioWares way of dealing with feedback obviously was summarizing all the systems that were complained about and removing them completely, except for the combat which they actually tried to improve.
And people who complained about things like the MAKO or elevators were hardly suggesting anything, just pointing fingers at something they think is responsible for certain annoyances, without suggesting a better solution.

Ofcourse you cant follow everyones whishes. However, looking at how games like Fallout 3, Oblivion or Dragon Age can be turned into much better games through mods shows that there is a lot of creative power in the mass of users/players. Just like a player that puts together their perfect Dragon Age by choosing the right mods that fit all together seamlessly, a developer would be well advised to properly evaluate user feedback and consider it.
Thats certainly better than thinking they made the perfect game and insult us with claims like Mass Effect 2 offers a great sense of exploration while most people (and not just the vocal minority) agree that the exploration aspect is one of ME2s major weaknesses.

Modifié par Vena_86, 12 août 2010 - 09:53 .

[Schneidend]

I fail to understand how ME1 provided any more "exploration" than ME2, as some claim. Sure, you could go to more individual planets in ME1, but what was there to explore beyond the scenery? Nearly everything worth finding was already highlighted on your map. Face it, neither game in this trilogy is Elder Scrolls, Baldur's Gate, or Fallout when it comes to vast areas and hidden goodies.



ME3 could change this. Since Casey has said relatively little time is going to be devoted to gameplay tweaks- which is understandable, as I found ME2's gameplay extremely polished and the only thing I'd like to see change are the volume of armor choices and an increased importance of the benefits they offer- ME3 will be an opportunity to focus on these aspects more than ME2, which I imagine is what Casey intended to communicate.

[Gorn Kregore]

Schneidend wrote...

I fail to understand how ME1 provided any more "exploration" than ME2, as some claim. Sure, you could go to more individual planets in ME1, but what was there to explore beyond the scenery? Nearly everything worth finding was already highlighted on your map. Face it, neither game in this trilogy is Elder Scrolls, Baldur's Gate, or Fallout when it comes to vast areas and hidden goodies.

ME3 could change this. Since Casey has said relatively little time is going to be devoted to gameplay tweaks- which is understandable, as I found ME2's gameplay extremely polished and the only thing I'd like to see change are the volume of armor choices and an increased importance of the benefits they offer- ME3 will be an opportunity to focus on these aspects more than ME2, which I imagine is what Casey intended to communicate.

Can't argue with that. Hopefully that's whats gonna happen..

[CatatonicMan]

Gorn Kregore wrote...

Can't argue with that. Hopefully that's whats gonna happen..

I could, but I am le tired. So I won't.

[Schneidend]

CatatonicMan wrote...

Gorn Kregore wrote...

Can't argue with that. Hopefully that's whats gonna happen..

I could, but I am le tired. So I won't.

Mwahahahaha! My nite owl tendencies have won an argument before it's even started.

[Pocketgb]

Vena_86 wrote...
BioWares way of dealing with feedback obviously was summarizing all the systems that were complained about and removing them completely, except for the combat which they actually tried to improve.
And people who complained about things like the MAKO or elevators were hardly suggesting anything, just pointing fingers at something they think is responsible for certain annoyances, without suggesting a better solution.

This is what always happens on a game forum (especially dealing with a rather popular franchise) and these forums are no exception: The valid complaints are far and few between all the filler "THIS SUCKS" posts.

Vena_86 wrote...
Ofcourse you cant follow everyones whishes. However, looking at how games like Fallout 3, Oblivion or Dragon Age can be turned into much better games through mods shows that there is a lot of creative power in the mass of users/players. Just like a player that puts together their perfect Dragon Age by choosing the right mods that fit all together seamlessly, a developer would be well advised to properly evaluate user feedback and consider it.

What's the most popular mod right here on the social site? A respec mod.
What's one of the first things mentioned that'll be in Awakening? Respeccing. Just one of many benefits when you introduce modding into your game.

You'll see very little cons when regarding game modification. I think the only thing "bad" about it is that the tools can be hard to develop.

Vena_86 wrote...
Thats certainly better than thinking they made the perfect game and insult us with claims like Mass Effect 2 offers a great sense of exploration while most people (and not just the vocal minority) agree that the exploration aspect is one of ME2s major weaknesses.

Exploration is one of Bioware's weaknesses. That's what's been seperating them from Bethesda for years on end: The latter is good at providing an open-ended experience, while the former is much better at making things personalized.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 13 août 2010 - 05:40 .

[FataliTensei]

I don't understand why they still call it an action/rpg. Mass Effect 1 - sure. Mass Effect 2 - just slide it on the shelf next to Gears of War. I mean there were a few elements in ME2 but overall it just felt like the rpg elements were more an afterthought to the tps focused gameplay, even the abilities took a backseat to gunplay. It's sad but obvious nothing's gonna change for the better.

[Jebel Krong]

FataliTensei wrote...

I don't understand why they still call it an action/rpg. Mass Effect 1 - sure. Mass Effect 2 - just slide it on the shelf next to Gears of War. I mean there were a few elements in ME2 but overall it just felt like the rpg elements were more an afterthought to the tps focused gameplay, even the abilities took a backseat to gunplay. It's sad but obvious nothing's gonna change for the better.

i think this post succinctly proves pocketgb's own... <_<

[FataliTensei]

Jebel Krong wrote...

FataliTensei wrote...

I don't understand why they still call it an action/rpg. Mass Effect 1 - sure. Mass Effect 2 - just slide it on the shelf next to Gears of War. I mean there were a few elements in ME2 but overall it just felt like the rpg elements were more an afterthought to the tps focused gameplay, even the abilities took a backseat to gunplay. It's sad but obvious nothing's gonna change for the better.

i think this post succinctly proves pocketgb's own... <_<

own what?

[Torhagen]

DarthCaine wrote...

Burdokva wrote...

You know, I dearly hope Mass Effect 2 turns out to sell less copies than the original; far less so.

It already sold more than ME1 and DAO and the majority prefers ME2 over ME1

i make a bold statement here but i believe most of the People who bought ME2 wouldnt usually buy DA:O
and if Bioware keeps this trend of nearly extinguishing the RPG like no Inventory, no Loot, Little Character Development, Choice with no Impact, very Linear game they will lose their loyal customers.

I forgot one thing Conflicts are solved with guns there is nearly no example where you would have been able to talk your way out.

P.S the Question is will any of those 1.000 possibilties have an actual impact on the game ?
Or will they all be some minor things like in ME2.

Modifié par Torhagen, 13 août 2010 - 11:44 .

[catabuca]

Schneidend wrote...

I fail to understand how ME1 provided any more "exploration" than ME2, as some claim. Sure, you could go to more individual planets in ME1, but what was there to explore beyond the scenery? Nearly everything worth finding was already highlighted on your map. Face it, neither game in this trilogy is Elder Scrolls, Baldur's Gate, or Fallout when it comes to vast areas and hidden goodies.

ME3 could change this. Since Casey has said relatively little time is going to be devoted to gameplay tweaks- which is understandable, as I found ME2's gameplay extremely polished and the only thing I'd like to see change are the volume of armor choices and an increased importance of the benefits they offer- ME3 will be an opportunity to focus on these aspects more than ME2, which I imagine is what Casey intended to communicate.

I think it's more about a sense of exploration than anything else. The subconscious effect that landing on a largely empty planet and driving around it had. (Incidentally, on a handful of planets there were things that weren't marked on the map - like raiders, extra camps etc. There weren't many, but there were a few. And you had to explore to find the minerals. But I take your point that the plot stuff and ruins were marked on the map. I guess Joker did a scan.) While the side missions in ME2 are varied, I think when people bemoan the lack of 'exploration' they mean you're funnelled into the building/area, shoot through it (or solve the puzzle) and fly away again. Just a handful of more 'exploratory' side worlds would have been great.

I'm not defending the way these were handled in ME1. While I enjoyed the Mako in my 1st and 2nd playthroughs, in subsequent ones it got boring pretty quickly, and I tended to only bother looking for minerals early in the game when I needed the money - after that I went to my target and left. As I say, a mixture of different styles would have been great.

[Lumikki]

Vena_86 wrote...

Ofcourse you cant follow everyones whishes. However, looking at how games like Fallout 3, Oblivion or Dragon Age can be turned into much better games through mods shows that there is a lot of creative power in the mass of users/players. Just like a player that puts together their perfect Dragon Age by choosing the right mods that fit all together seamlessly, a developer would be well advised to properly evaluate user feedback and consider it.
Thats certainly better than thinking they made the perfect game and insult us with claims like Mass Effect 2 offers a great sense of exploration while most people (and not just the vocal minority) agree that the exploration aspect is one of ME2s major weaknesses.

What is better game is opinion. ME2 did miss the Mako, what made ME1 feel to have better exploration. Other way ME1 had no better exploration than ME2. Example one is big hub and other has 3 little ones, doesn't make exploration better or worst, if total size of "area" is about equal. So, in the end, it's just Mako and those little empty world, what did make ME1 exploration better.

PS: I liked Mako.

Modifié par Lumikki, 13 août 2010 - 11:44 .

[Jebel Krong]

Lumikki wrote...

Vena_86 wrote...

Ofcourse you cant follow everyones whishes. However, looking at how games like Fallout 3, Oblivion or Dragon Age can be turned into much better games through mods shows that there is a lot of creative power in the mass of users/players. Just like a player that puts together their perfect Dragon Age by choosing the right mods that fit all together seamlessly, a developer would be well advised to properly evaluate user feedback and consider it.
Thats certainly better than thinking they made the perfect game and insult us with claims like Mass Effect 2 offers a great sense of exploration while most people (and not just the vocal minority) agree that the exploration aspect is one of ME2s major weaknesses.

What is better game is opinion. ME2 did miss the Mako, what made ME1 feel to have better exploration. Other way ME1 had no better exploration than ME2. Example one is big hub and other has 3 little ones, doesn't make exploration better or worst, if total size of "area" is about equal. So, in the end, it's just Mako and those little empty world, what did make ME1 exploration better.

PS: I liked Mako.

the mako in overlord-type environments would be the best solution, although the workload required would probably be prohibitive for too many of those...

[Khavos]

DarthCaine wrote...

Burdokva wrote...

You know, I dearly hope Mass Effect 2 turns out to sell less copies than the original; far less so.

It already sold more than ME1 and DAO and the majority prefers ME2 over ME1

Please don't lie.

[Lumikki]

Khavos wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

Burdokva wrote...

You know, I dearly hope Mass Effect 2 turns out to sell less copies than the original; far less so.

It already sold more than ME1 and DAO and the majority prefers ME2 over ME1

Please don't lie.

Actually, I don't think it's lie, if you compare same amount of time. How ever, differences how much those 3 games sold isn't really that big to make any point to any direction.

[Khavos]

Lumikki wrote...

Actually, I don't think it's lie, if you compare same amount of time. How ever, differences how much those 3 games sold isn't really that big to make any point to any direction.

Alright.  Currently, it's a lie.  It might not be a lie in the future, but that's unlikely.  

[catabuca]

As I've already mentioned, it's utterly pointless talking about sales in this context. A portion of ME2 sales were made simply on the back of people loving ME1. That means there is no correlation between the number of those sales and how good the game actually is. You don't buy the game in week one having already played it and decided it's a better game than ME1. You buy it in week one because the marketing has persuaded you to, or because you played the first and thought it was great. So such exposition is pointless.

[sanadawarrior]

Khavos wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Actually, I don't think it's lie, if you compare same amount of time. How ever, differences how much those 3 games sold isn't really that big to make any point to any direction.

Alright.  Currently, it's a lie.  It might not be a lie in the future, but that's unlikely.  

Its actualy quite likely considering ME2 hasnt seen a holiday season yet.

[Jebel Krong]

Lumikki wrote...

Khavos wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

Burdokva wrote...

You know, I dearly hope Mass Effect 2 turns out to sell less copies than the original; far less so.

It already sold more than ME1 and DAO and the majority prefers ME2 over ME1

Please don't lie.

Actually, I don't think it's lie, if you compare same amount of time. How ever, differences how much those 3 games sold isn't really that big to make any point to any direction.

it's not a lie - even inaccurate sites like vgchatrz have me2 selling both higher and faster than mass effect 1. argue all you want, but it's rare for even a bad sequel to sell less than the first game in a series... and mass effect 2 is far from that - the people holding onto that foolish notion are the same few sad people saying "me2 sucks! me2 is all pew pew!" etc.

[Khavos]

Jebel Krong wrote...

it's not a lie - even inaccurate sites like vgchatrz have me2 selling both higher and faster than mass effect 1. argue all you want, but it's rare for even a bad sequel to sell less than the first game in a series... and mass effect 2 is far from that - the people holding onto that foolish notion are the same few sad people saying "me2 sucks! me2 is all pew pew!" etc.

ME1 wasn't the only game mentioned in the initial quote.

ME2 is all pew pew, by the way.  Derivative third-person cover shooter is derivative. 

[Kai Hohiro]

Khavos wrote...

ME1 wasn't the only game mentioned in the initial quote.

ME2 has already outsold DA:O on the 360, despite being released months later.
DA:O is multiplattform, which is the only reason total sales across all plattforms are higher.

I don't get you people. On one hand you want to argue that ME2 was streamlined to appeal to more gamers, but than on the other hand you want to argue ME1 sold more.

Modifié par Kai Hohiro, 13 août 2010 - 02:10 .

[Khavos]

Kai Hohiro wrote...

ME2 has already outsold DA:O on the 360, despite being released months later.
DA:O is multiplattform, which is the only reason total sales across all plattforms are higher.

I don't get you people. On one hand you want to argue that ME2 was streamlined to appeal to more gamers, but than on the other hand you want to argue ME1 sold more.

You sure about that?