153 réponses à ce sujet

[Sidney]

Terror_K wrote...
And it's a misconception that The Mako itself is hated... sadly one that BioWare believes. Most people will, if pressed on the subject, fully admit that it was more the worlds you landed on and the lack of variety that was the problem, and not The Mako itself. And many believe that The Hammerhead is by far a worse vehicle.

You are wrong again, the MAKO was terrible. It was an awful contraption that made no logical sense as a exploration machine - seriously it is thwarted by canyons, rivers or cliffs - and was as bad as a game tool. The controls were awful, the driving experience terrible.

Still, the problem with plentary exploration is planetary exploration. It is the same problem that any open world game has. There is the stuff, and that is interesting, and then there is the stuff between the stuff and that is nothing but empty terrain to be traversed. There's a short period of thrill in a open world of feeling like the world is "alive" because you can roam free but then it becomes a dreary- some excercise in walking across empty space.

Even if the backgrounds were great and each planet was distinct how long does that joy last when you are driving to another mineral deposit or downed probe? You can't jazz things up that much if what you are doing is boring. I was happy to lose the hidden package quests and driving with the simple observation that I can land anywhere I want so why wouldn't I land close to where I want to go?

[Gundar3]

Terror_K wrote...

Marbazoid wrote...

Your not actually loosing any choice, all the options are still there, just not in the form of a traditional inventory. I would go as far to say that ME2 offers MORE weapon options. Would everyone be happy if they just put back in a truckload of each weapon to pick up, that each vary only slightly in appearance and stats?

Yes, actually... I would prefer that. It's better than ME2's completely linear, uncustomisable and shallow weapons system.

Since when did anyone like the ME1 inventory? I thought it was just as popular as the mako.

Where does this misconception come from that an inventory system in a Mass Effect game has to either be like the system in ME1 or the stripped down, shallow system of ME2? Haven't there been enough other games released in the last 30 years to illustrate that there are other ways of doing things? Isn't the possibility of a middle-fround possible?  Why is everything so black and white, and how come anybody who complains about ME2's inventory (or lack thereof) gets auto-labeled as an "ME1 Inventory Lover" suddenly?

Yes... ME1's inventory was flawed. You'll be hard pressed to find somebody who disagrees with that. But ME2's replacement system is hardly any better, and in some cases far worse. Both have issues, but they're almost completely opposite issues. ME1's inventory was too needlessly complex, with too many items, too much junk and poor balancing. ME2's system was too simple and lacking, with too few items, a terribly linear system, and no real customisation.

And it's a misconception that The Mako itself is hated... sadly one that BioWare believes. Most people will, if pressed on the subject, fully admit that it was more the worlds you landed on and the lack of variety that was the problem, and not The Mako itself. And many believe that The Hammerhead is by far a worse vehicle.

I gotta agree with this sentiment.  Although, after all the DLC including weapons and armor, I feel like ME2 is finally a fully fleshed out game in terms of different weapons and armor (although I still wouldnt mind more).  The vanilla ME2 was horrendously lacking in different weapons and armor which the DLC made up for.  Whether that policy is acceptable or not is up to you.  I make the same argument about the ME1 inventory.  It was terrible in that there was only 2 different kinds of each weapon, just throw in a new color scheme which is terrible itemization.  It didn't help that nothing was stackable and most of it became junk extremely quickly... assuming the object was even worthwhile to begin with.  The problem was that the ME1 inventory was salvagable and really wasn't that difficult to understand, although the controls and the manor in which upgrades were attached was clunky at best.  IMO if they simply added more wepon and armor models and simplified the controls while
getting rid of the superfluous upgrades, it could be a great system.  A real middle ground.

About the Mako.  I actually cheered when I saw it wrecked in the crash DLC... The thing is as Terror K pointed out it wasnt the mako I hated, it was the planets.  The speed of it was fine given the size of the maps, the weapons were fine for what we went up against, and it wasn't really that difficult to control once you learned how it handled... But sweet Lord, whatever they used for a terrain generator needs to be junked in a bad way.  Its not the atmosphere or the bland colors, its the sheer cliff-faces that you were normally required to scale.  There was seldom an actual "path" that you were supposed to go on, and even then most people were too frustrated to hunt around the map for them.  The way I normally found a worthwhile path to my objctive was by falling on it from 500 meters up. Terrible... Terrible terrain. 

[Iakus]

While I kinda wish there were more options for weapons in ME 2, it's the ability to modify them that I really miss.



I like being able to tinker with a weapon, trade off one stat for another to make what I would think of as the "perfect weapon" One that fits my playstyle best. To be able to put a special barrel on the gun that lowers damage a little, but improves recoil. Up the accuracy in exchange for lower ammo capacity. That kind of thing.



Not that ME 1 was particularly good with it. But at least the mods weren't totally linear that applied equally to all weapons of that type. Booooring!

[Merlin 47]

I hated the "inventory" system in ME 1.  It was one of the few things that made the game just drag out longer than it should have (and not in the good way).  I like finding weapons in missions, as how it's done in ME 2.

As for having customizable armor for everyone...if it's done like how they do it for Shepard in ME 2, then yes.  I would fully support and get behind this.  I wasn't crazy about ME 1's way of doing it.  Partially because I happened to like how the crew looked "normally" (well, Kaiden and Liara were the only exceptions to this.  Kaiden never saw action after he was "forced" on you in the beginning and it really didn't matter to me with Liara).

I'd like to keep the weapon system as it is now in ME 2 for ME 3.  IF they were to change it, then maybe add a "weapon leveling" system, like shown a few pages back.  But don't give us some 50+ weapons that I'll never use and just get rid of.

[Aedan_Cousland]

About the Mako.  I actually cheered when I saw it wrecked in the crash DLC... The thing is as Terror K pointed out it wasnt the mako I hated, it was the planets.  The speed of it was fine given the size of the maps, the weapons were fine for what we went up against, and it wasn't really that difficult to control once you learned how it handled... But sweet Lord, whatever they used for a terrain generator needs to be junked in a bad way.  Its not the atmosphere or the bland colors, its the sheer cliff-faces that you were normally required to scale.  There was seldom an actual "path" that you were supposed to go on, and even then most people were too frustrated to hunt around the map for them.  The way I normally found a worthwhile path to my objctive was by falling on it from 500 meters up. Terrible... Terrible terrain. 

 
I agree that the biggest problem with the Mako was the terrain the player was often given to operate it on. Trying to climb up sheer cliff faces to reach objectives isn't fun. Unfortunately Bioware overreacted to the complaints about the Mako and scrapped it entirely in ME2, rather than just fixing it for the sequel and giving the player easier & more interesting terrain to explore. I hope an improved ground exploration vehicle returns in ME3, just with terrain to explore that doesn't have sheer cliff faces, and that is more varied and interesting than  ME1.

[Spartas Husky]

It was the greatest thing ever to scrap things, so they could resell i to us , after they improved it.



Why improve soemthing then package it with the game, when you can sell it ona separate package?.

[Elite Midget]

The inventory system could get quite cluttered but the new system just has so few choices. Especially in the armor department.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Instead of buying or finding a weapon or upgrade and putting it in the inventory and switch to it when you need you have to 1) find the item in the game, 2) scan for resources using a dull mini-game, 3) walk to Mordin's lab and "research it" (unless it requires more crap - in that case repeast steps 1 through 3), 4) walk to Jacob's armory to equip it. Once you are in the game you can switch an item by returning to the Normandy and select it in the armory.

So, to "help" the player switching weapons the game designers have scattered armories all around the galaxy which magically have contact with Jacob's armory on the Normandy. You can find those in the most exotic places: Enemy merc bases, ancient planets, collector ships, etc. You name it. This highly improbable device is everywhere.

Armor is even worse. You can only switch to it at the end of the first mission after speaking with tIM, on the Normandy, and on one of the DLCs.

In general: Assume you are on a mission that requires a certain item (which you could not have known before the mission) and no magical armory (or armor thingy) is present then the only thing you can do is to load an old saved game and go to the Normandy to equip that item and restart the mission.

Edit: At the start of a mission you have at least access your weapons. However, in a lot of cases the mission description is not enough to decide what you'll need before hand.

[sarcasm]Yes... I can clearly see why not having an inventory is handy.[/sarcasm]

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 15 septembre 2010 - 08:02 .

[Christmas Ape]

In general: Assume you are on a mission that requires a certain item (which you could not have known before the mission) and no magical armory (or armor thingy) is present then the only thing you can do is to load an old saved game and go to the Normandy to equip that item and restart the mission.

[sarcasm]Yes... I can clearly see why not having an inventory is handy.[/sarcasm]

So should I be coming up with an irrelevant hypothetical scenario in which having an inventory is a detriment, or were you just padding the word count with this part?

Modifié par Christmas Ape, 15 septembre 2010 - 08:00 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

Christmas Ape wrote...

In general: Assume you are on a mission that requires a certain item (which you could not have known before the mission) and no magical armory (or armor thingy) is present then the only thing you can do is to load an old saved game and go to the Normandy to equip that item and restart the mission.

[sarcasm]Yes... I can clearly see why not having an inventory is handy.[/sarcasm]

So should I be coming up with an irrelevant hypothetical scenario in which having an inventory is a detriment, or were you just padding the word count with this part?

Do whatever you like. I have given my opinion. It's not my place to pose limits on yours.

[Kilshrek]

"Cutting off the nose to spite the face"



This is what the removal of the inventory seemed like.



Too many weapons in ME 1? True, but then in ME 2 we got way too few, and almost no means of customizing them. I liked making a 1-shot kills-almost-anything sniper rifle in ME 1. Just slap on some mods, the right ammo, and there you go. The balance was in the cool down time. It took forever to cool down, forcing you to switch to another weapon. This also leads on to the ammo situation, which doesn't need to be discussed here.



Armour was another issue, more or less like guns. It made sense that some manufacturers had superior armour, offering the best shields, etc.



Reducing redundancy among weapons and armour would have been better if it were limited to a few manufacturers, budget to top of the line stuff. For example differing levels of protection, such as higher shields at the cost of tech/biotic protection made sense, don't know why that had to go. With weapons, higher damage, lower ROF, armour penetration/shield or barrier penetration values could have been added on top of existing weapons, while again reducing the overall number to reduce redundant weapons.

[Vena_86]

I always get the feeling that people who hate inventory systems only know the Mass Effect version. With more experience throughout different genres it is not that hard to see how a really good, comfortable, yet complex inventory system can look like. Me thinks developers should play more games....And players should be more open minded and look beyond whats right infront of them.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Removing inventory of Me1 was absolutely the right choice not only from a design standpoint but also thematically for Me2. As an "Action-RPG", having too much downtime between the action parts breaks up the game in a way that makes things seem very cumbersome and non-seamless. The upgrade system took much of the inventory and put it in the background, accomplishing much of the same thing without the player having to spend ten minutes every other mission trying to maximize their gear setup and removing the "junk loot" and "false choices" that often plague RPGs with redundant loot. However, that isn't to say that this was the best choice they could have made, and there are improvements to the system that can be made to utilize more customization options without bogging down the game in spreadsheets.

For Me3 they need to expand the inventory system of Me2 to include more choices, such as weapon mods which you can place on your weapon before a mission. All armor sets should be modular and those mods should make more of a difference than they did in Me2. Also more squad customization in the form of giving them a few sets of armor for them, but armor that is distinct enough that visually the characters don't look interchangeable from one another like they could in the first Me. The inventory should be a part of the experience and a crucial component to each mission even without you ever having to actually access an inventory screen.

Modifié par SurfaceBeneath, 15 septembre 2010 - 08:40 .

[phatpat63]

Gundar3 wrote...

About the Mako.  I actually cheered when I saw it wrecked in the crash DLC... The thing is as Terror K pointed out it wasnt the mako I hated, it was the planets.  The speed of it was fine given the size of the maps, the weapons were fine for what we went up against, and it wasn't really that difficult to control once you learned how it handled... But sweet Lord, whatever they used for a terrain generator needs to be junked in a bad way.  Its not the atmosphere or the bland colors, its the sheer cliff-faces that you were normally required to scale.  There was seldom an actual "path" that you were supposed to go on, and even then most people were too frustrated to hunt around the map for them.  The way I normally found a worthwhile path to my objctive was by falling on it from 500 meters up. Terrible... Terrible terrain. 

Amen brother. Amen.

[Getorex]

I prefer as much realism as possible and as a result I tend to really hate inventory systems when they allow you to carry a bazillion things around. Sorry, never ever possible. It is one thing to collect a doohicky here, a gizmo there, and then transfer it to the ship where there could be a storage room capable of holding it all but it is ridiculous when your character has 50 or 100 items on their person (without a totally unwieldy and monstrously heavy pack on your back to carry all that crap). If there is to be an inventory system, make it REALISTIC, require that items be stored on the ship or in a storage location on one or more planets, and do NOT give access to all the stuff in the inventory no matter where one is. If you have traveled far from your ship, then too bad, all the crap you've collected is on the Normandy and to get it you either have to have it dropped for you or you have to go back to the ship to collect it (and swap something else). You are absolutely NOT able to carry buttloads of weapons, clothes, armor, sensors, etc, etc, etc, and be in any way effective or foot-mobile.



I did hate the totally disorganized and repetitive ME1 inventory system. If they wanted to bring such a system back, then I would prefer it be somewhere between ME1 and ME2 (favoring ME2) so that it was simplified, organized, and restricted to a storage location that has to be accessed in some way to get to it all.

[Getorex]

I liked the Mako. On the theme of realism, however, I hated that it was almost capable of driving up a near-vertical wall, as well as driving down a near-vertical wall. I wouldn't mind getting it back, though I also didn't mind the new vehicle tested in ME2 either - JUST KEEP IT REALISTIC given the design and physics please. If you roll over, you are screwed (rather than the magical way the Mako always righted itself if you rolled over) and have to egress the vehicle and then either salvage/repair/upright the vehicle or lose it.

[lazuli]

iakus wrote...

While I kinda wish there were more options for weapons in ME 2, it's the ability to modify them that I really miss.

I like being able to tinker with a weapon, trade off one stat for another to make what I would think of as the "perfect weapon" One that fits my playstyle best. To be able to put a special barrel on the gun that lowers damage a little, but improves recoil. Up the accuracy in exchange for lower ammo capacity. That kind of thing.

Not that ME 1 was particularly good with it. But at least the mods weren't totally linear that applied equally to all weapons of that type. Booooring!

Ammo powers and the truly different examples within the same classification of weapons (Scimitar and Claymore, Viper and Widow, etc) are enough customization for me.  In ME1, it was an interesting feature that was poorly implemented, as you more or less stated.  There was typically one setup that was vastly superior to the others.  For example, taking ammo mods other than the +40% damage to organics or synthetics was usually a mistake (except in the case of krogan on Insanity).

I hope ME3's inventory system (or lack thereof) largely remains the same as ME2, although I would certainly welcome more varied examples of weaponry like the ones appearing in recent DLC.  What would be really awesome is if our ME2 DLC could carry over, though I can certainly think of reasons this won't happen.

[Kavadas]

The Mako was great. As for the world design, yeah, forcing us to roam over insane topography is what made things difficult for the Mako (and even then the Mako easily conquered it).

As I've said a bunch of times on the forums, if you took ME1's mod system, threw all of the level based item garbage out of the window so there was just a single version of everything, and then instituted it just like the weapons and armor of ME2 things would have been perfect.

You wouldn't worry about the quantities of items you had but if you hit the armory you'd just drop in phasic rounds, a scram rail, and some frictionless materials and rolled.

But they key is there's only one version of phasic rounds, one version of scram rails, and one version of frictionless materials; you would just procure these mods like anything else in ME2.

You get all of your customization, absolutely no boring item redundancy, and you don't have to concern yourself with how many of an individual item you have.

It's win-win.

Edited for clarification.

Modifié par Kavadas, 15 septembre 2010 - 05:51 .

[lazuli]

Kavadas wrote...
It's win-win.

Except the weapons in ME1 were basically the same as all the other weapons of that type.  You wouldn't be able to replicate the Vindicator, for example, or the Geth Plasma Shotgun.

[Kavadas]

lazuli wrote...

Kavadas wrote...
It's win-win.

Except the weapons in ME1 were basically the same as all the other weapons of that type.  You wouldn't be able to replicate the Vindicator, for example, or the Geth Plasma Shotgun.

My post was about mods.  The armor and weapons of ME2 were a million times better than ME1.

Sorry that wasn't clear.

Modifié par Kavadas, 15 septembre 2010 - 05:47 .

[lazuli]

Kavadas wrote...
My post was about mods.  The armor and weapons of ME2 were a million times better than ME1.

Sorry that wasn't clear.

Oh, cool.  Yeah, my bad.  I like ammo powers, but I can see why people miss the flexibility of the old system, even if it was imperfect.  At the very least Bioware could strive to make all the ammo powers viable on all difficulty levels.  Poor, poor Shredder Ammo.

[PWENER]

I prefer the new sistem. Running around opening crates and using used guns like some kind of intergalactic hobo was awful. I hope they keep the new sistem.

[CatatonicMan]

I could actually accept the weapon-locker system in ME2 as an inventory replacement if they hadn't tossed out the good parts of the ME1 inventory when they decided to burn the fields.

[Iakus]

lazuli wrote...

Ammo powers and the truly different examples within the same classification of weapons (Scimitar and Claymore, Viper and Widow, etc) are enough customization for me.  In ME1, it was an interesting feature that was poorly implemented, as you more or less stated.  There was typically one setup that was vastly superior to the others.  For example, taking ammo mods other than the +40% damage to organics or synthetics was usually a mistake (except in the case of krogan on Insanity).

I hope ME3's inventory system (or lack thereof) largely remains the same as ME2, although I would certainly welcome more varied examples of weaponry like the ones appearing in recent DLC.  What would be really awesome is if our ME2 DLC could carry over, though I can certainly think of reasons this won't happen.

I'm actually not wild about special ammo being powers either.  It just doesn't seem to make much sense to me:

Infiltrator Shepard:  "Huh.  What does this button do?"  ::click:: "Hey!  Cryo Ammo!  Why didn't anyone tell me sniper rifles had these?

Garrus "That's odd.  Mine doesn't"

The secret to "good" modding, I believe, is to offer a tradeoff.  You can get away with providing a small bump in a stat using a mod.  But a significant bonus should come with drawbacks as well.  That's where things went off the rails in ME 1 (well, besides the "rain of loot")  Eventually your weapons can get godlike if you can find the right upgrades.  But what if frictionless materials also gave a steep penalty to damage?  What if a scram rail's damage bonus and penalty to heat absorption were closer in numbers?

I've preached it before, but an example of a modification system done right was Alpha Protocol.  Very few weapons of each type, but four slots to mod with, plus two "special" ammo types for each weapon.  Customize to your heart's content!  As long as you can find or buy the mods you want. 

As far as Mass Effect goes, if they made weapons modular like armor currently is, I think that could work.  Provided the mods gave meaningful bonuses and there were more pieces available than there is for armor now.

[StarcloudSWG]

Weapons are modular in ME2. If you pay attention to the upgrades you're doing, you realize that you're swapping out modular parts for improved versions.

It's just that there isn't an item in an inventory screen that you have to 'manually' insert into the chosen weapon. They removed that waste of time from the game, and the game is better for it.