98 réponses à ce sujet

[JaegerBane]

sinosleep wrote...

There;s nothing fanatical about it,

Heh, you think? I'd barely finished posting before Kronner was already on here raving about what Christina said. 'Fanatical' maybe too strong a word - 'elicits strong opinions' may be a better a phrase.

I just posted both quotes one after the other. If you can't see that they are SUBSTANTIALLY different I don't know what to tell you.

Trust me sino, a 'feature' that requires an undocumented command procedure and a 'bug' that occurs when using a procedure is  the development equivalent of a mirror image. There isn't any logical difference between them. Hell, I've written stuff like this myself in the products my company creates.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:43 .

[Kronner]

JaegerBane wrote...
Kronner was already on here raving about what Christina said

Raving? If you want to call quoting a dev post raving, sure.

[sinosleep]

Whatever man, I'm done with this. Like I said, if you can't see the difference between a dev posting a tip ON THEIR OWN (as I've seen no evidence the trick had been discovered before she posted it) and a dev reacting to a player discovery and labeling it as a bug (which if she was so keen on simply passing off bugs as features she could have) then I don't know what to tell you and we have nothing to discuss here.

[JaegerBane]

Kronner wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

All I can say is Kronner, if I had a quid for every time a developer billed an exploit/bug/fortuitous operation as an 'advanced tip', or 'a little trick', or 'it's not a bug, it's a feature!', I'd be able to retire from software development already

All I can say...who cares about your job and what does it have to do with a BioWare game? Just because I can write SNTP client in C++ does not mean I am eligible to say what is and what is not a bug in other SW. Your thinking is seriously flawed man. You somehow think you know more about the gameplay of ME2 than lead gameplay designer of the game. There are no words for that.

Seriously flawed? Have a read of this, Kronner. Nowhere have I stated that I know more about gameplay then Christina, either - you may want to read this too.

What I've actually said is that what you choose to call an action resulting from an undocumented procedure has no bearing on what it is.

Geez people, calm the hell down. I'm thinking 'fanatical' was the best word to use.

(wondering if you are gonna call Christina a liar this time)

There was a first time?

Modifié par JaegerBane, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:49 .

[JaegerBane]

sinosleep wrote...

Whatever man, I'm done with this. Like I said, if you can't see the difference between a dev posting a tip ON THEIR OWN (as I've seen no evidence the trick had been discovered before she posted it) and a dev reacting to a player discovery and labeling it as a bug (which if she was so keen on simply passing off bugs as features she could have) then I don't know what to tell you and we have nothing to discuss here.

Because you're getting your knickers in a twist over labels. I refuse to believe that you aren't intelligent enough to comprehend the actual logic behind both of these issues.

[Kronner]

JaegerBane wrote...

There was a first time?

Like you do not remember it.
You may want to read this. Might as well rename it to JaegerBane.

[JaegerBane]

Kronner wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

There was a first time?

Like you do not remember it.

I don't normally remember things I've never done, Kronner.

You may want to read this. Might as well rename it to JaegerBane.

Hmmm. Insults. I wondered when they'd start rearing their head. I'm guessing Godwin's Law is right around the corner.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 19 septembre 2010 - 06:56 .

[Kronner]

JaegerBane wrote...

Hmmm. Insults. I wondered when they'd start rearing their head.

Wikipedia article may be an insult in a way that it is not a reliable source. Definitely not insult to you. More like finding a proper title. And that was my last this-thread tribute to you bud.

Modifié par Kronner, 19 septembre 2010 - 07:00 .

[JaegerBane]

Kronner wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

Hmmm. Insults. I wondered when they'd start rearing their head.

Wikipedia article may be an insult in a way that it is not a reliable source. Definitely not insult to you. More like finding a proper title.

So calling someone a know-it-all is considered a term of endearment where you're from, eh?

I can tell I've touched a nerve here. But on the other hand, I'd appreciate it if you address my argument rather than just start with the Ad Hominem attacks. If you don't agree with what I'm saying, explain why, but don't bloody well start the infantile name-calling when you can't think of anything else to say.

[RGFrog]

You only have 1 point in warp ammo? What is that, a 15% boost vs. barriers? It's nothing you'll notice.

Take it to heavy warp and it works wonders. 50% damage to practically everything and 2x damage to targets already affected by a biotic. Toss a singularity and shoot the fish in the barrel.

Best all around ammo. Not specialized but if you want something that does damage to everything then take heavy warp and put it on a Shuriken or Tempest and you have 50% damage boost to EVERYTHING.

Sure, AP or Inferno is better for armor and health. Sure Disruptor is better for shields/synthetics. But none of them are effective against as many layers as warp ammo.

You should still take Inferno, though, and give your squad cryo.

[RGFrog]

ROFL...should've read the whole enchilada.

Both are bugs. Plain and simple. If reloading, as in the trick, was intentional, then the animation would play faster and there'd be no "trick". It's a happy hiccup in the code. A bug. Either in the reload coding or in the animation, but it wasn't intentional. That much is obvious to even the most casual of gamer.

Just like the quirk with Stasis wasn't intentional. Stasis is a hack. CN admitted to the programmers having to do a lot of workarounds to get stasis to just work. It does what it does, not by design, but as a by product of everything else they had to kludge to get stasis to work at all.

Arguing that either is approved or not, exploit or not, is moot. They are both bugs. One has been renamed a feature and the other has been explained as a fortunate side effect. Both are obvious spins. Both are bugs.

Modifié par RGFrog, 19 septembre 2010 - 11:46 .

[ryoldschool]

RGFrog wrote...

ROFL...should've read the whole enchilada.

Both are bugs. Plain and simple. If reloading, as in the trick, was intentional, then the animation would play faster and there'd be no "trick". It's a happy hiccup in the code. A bug. Either in the reload coding or in the animation, but it wasn't intentional. That much is obvious to even the most casual of gamer.

Just like the quirk with Stasis wasn't intentional. Stasis is a hack. CN admitted to the programmers having to do a lot of workarounds to get stasis to just work. It does what it does, not by design, but as a by product of everything else they had to kludge to get stasis to work at all.

Arguing that either is approved or not, exploit or not, is moot. They are both bugs. One has been renamed a feature and the other has been explained as a fortunate side effect. Both are obvious spins. Both are bugs.

I agree with RGFrog here.  Game is amazing that they can add new features without having the whole thing explode when a new DLC comes out.

[sinosleep]

ME 2 is HARDLY the first game to feature the ability to cut off animations. Ever play Tekken, Street Fighter, King of Fighters, Samurai Showdown? Yup, each and every one of them allows you to cut off animations, while recieving the benefit of the animation you cut off, if you make the proper input in time. NONE of the manuals that come with these games EVER tout this ability, but everyone who is into these games knows it's there and has been for over a decade. It's not a glitch in any of those games, it's a feature. So lets not get into what is or isn't obvious to the "casual" gamer. Cause having been a fighting game fan all my life I'm VERY familiar with the ability to cut off animations, the fact that it's NEVER included in manuals, and the fact it hasn't changed in years which tells me it's not a recurring glitch that just so happens to happen in a plethora of fighting games.

p.s. I also fail to see hw calling a bug a bug is in any way shape or form SPIN. Spin would imply that Bioware is claiming it's not a bug, which it is as they've claimed it to be.

Modifié par sinosleep, 20 septembre 2010 - 01:34 .

[swn32]

 

mosor wrote...

Regarding SMG upgrades, it does make a difference,. The less base time it takes for an SMG to take out a barrier, the less significant the warp ammo bonus is. These are not real numbers. But for instance if an SMG with no upgrades takes 6 seconds to take out harby's shields than the 50% warp ammo bonus theoretically saves you 3 seconds. If you fully upgrade the SMG to 6/6 and it takes only 3 seconds to take out harby's shields, the warp ammo bonus only saves you a 1.5 seconds give or take. 

No no, you're doing the math wrong. If it takes 6 seconds to take out harbinger (barrier+armor) with an SMG, it should take roughly 4.45 seconds with WARP ammo and 4.69 seconds with AP ammo. Almost no difference. When the SMG is fully upgraded and damage maximizing talents and armor are unlocked, warp ammo will take 2.47 seconds while AP ammo will take 2.42 seconds (Assumptions: continuous stream of damage instead of discrete bullets, weapon fired at medium range for +25% damage boost, no headshots). Yeah its more or less clear how insignificant the difference is.

Then again JaergarBane has a point too, when you get the assault rifle or sniper rifle, AP ammo becomes redundant. ARs have a uniform multiplier against every kind of defense and snipers have a high armor damage multiplier. I personally take warp ammo for my soldier, since widow and mattock are my primary weapons. But even for other classes, AP ammo becomes less effective in levels where enemies use barriers.

sinosleep wrote...

ME 2 is HARDLY the first game to feature the ability to cut off animations. Ever play Tekken, Street Fighter, King of Fighters, Samurai Showdown? Yup, each and every one of them allows you to cut off animations, while recieving the benefit of the animation you cut off, if you make the proper input in time. NONE of the manuals that come with these games EVER tout this ability, but everyone who is into these games knows it's there and has been for over a decade. It's not a glitch in any of those games, it's a feature. So lets not get into what is or isn't obvious to the "casual" gamer. Cause having been a fighting game fan all my life I'm VERY familiar with the ability to cut off animations, the fact that it's NEVER included in manuals, and the fact it hasn't changed in years which tells me it's not a recurring glitch that just so happens to happen in a plethora of fighting games. 
p.s. I also fail to see hw calling a bug a bug is in any way shape or form SPIN. Spin would imply that Bioware is claiming it's not a bug, which it is as they've claimed it to be.

You can't really compare fighting games to this. Fighting games are built around combos and move cancellations. Where as here claymore tricking is just a bug. You cant shoot straight if you are in the middle of a melee animation, neither can you perform a melee when u fire something with the kickback of a claymore. Its just a bug, its unintended and shouldnt be called as a feature.

Modifié par swn32, 20 septembre 2010 - 02:08 .

[ajburges]

sinosleep wrote...

No, I'm asking that players be made AWARE that it's an exploit since some players don't like using them. I'm one of those players and have since stopped using it altogether on my vanguards (since the ridiculous fall damage was really the only reason to take it on that class IMO) while continuing to use it on classes that use it for the CC instead. Believe it or not there are those of us out there that would be rather pissed off to find out something we were using for X amount of time and thought was a valid tactic was actually an exploit.

[edit here] And I'll once again clarify that I have no issue with people who want to take advantage of exploits in single player games. I just don't think it should be talked about like it's an intended benefit when there are players who don't want to use exploits and will be unwittingly using one if they don't know any better.

Further validation of what sinosleep wrote. I will play with exploits and console commands for lol's but I like my first play through of any game/expansion/DLC to be exploit free so can experience the challenge as intended. When LotSB was released I brought my first character (ME1 and ME2) out of NG+ epilogue (I left some quests unfinished because I want to be able to change my choice for ME3).

At the sub-boss fight I was struggling to make progress until I tried Liara's stasis as a panic button against an aggressive teleport. All of the sudden the defenses she had DROPPED. I thought it was intensional that the fall she takes after Stasis was to be used. When I learned that it was actually due to a bug it took some of the sense of accomplishment from that fight away. If I knew that it was a bug I would have slave away to kill her by taking potshots with my max damage infiltrator Widow for 1/16 of her defenses.

[sinosleep]

swn32 wrote...

You can't really compare fighting games to this. Fighting games are built around combos and move cancellations. Where as here claymore tricking is just a bug. You cant shoot straight if you are in the middle of a melee animation, neither can you perform a melee when u fire something with the kickback of a claymore. Its just a bug, its unintended and shouldnt be called as a feature.

Says who? What is to stop the devolpers of Mass Effect from applying something thats over a DECADE old in fighting games to a TPS? Animation cancelations are nothing new in the gaming industry, what's to say they should be confined to the fighting genre? Personally I'd rather take the develper's word for it than to just simply assume, it's a TPS so therefore the same logic can't be applied.

Modifié par sinosleep, 20 septembre 2010 - 04:01 .

[swn32]

Did you follow JaegerBane's appeal to authority link? Reload tricking is as much as a glitch as stasis glitch. Neither of them were intended. I like to believe the game developers aren't dumb enough to have weapon shoot forward while its pointing sideways as a feature.

Animation cancellations are all well and good, but the whole shooting in between breaks it. There are somethings that are simply impossible to pull off. You can cancel a reload animation into a melee or a shooting animation into a reload etc etc.But its impossible to cancel a reload animation while your weapon is pointed upwards to a shot straight ahead while performing a melee. There are things like aim time, kickback of the shot, direction the gun is pointing that are totally unaccounted for.

Modifié par swn32, 20 septembre 2010 - 04:17 .

[sinosleep]

Again swn31, SAYS WHO? If the exact same concept has been around in fighting games for over a decade (cutting off an animation while still receiving full benefit) who are you to say it simply couldn't be applied to a tps. The surrounding evidence supports it. If Bioware was so keen on simply passing off bugs as benefits why bother admitting to the stasis bug at all? Why bother bringing up the reload trick all on their when no one was using it before hand? Christina Norman came out and UNPROMPTED decided to reveal how the reload trick worked. Stasis was brought up by the community, she initially had no comment other than to look into it, and then came out and told us all flat out it was a bug. I don't see the two as one in the same and I don't see why something that's been around in fighting games for so long (again, entirely undocumented as far as official manuals go) should for arbitrary reasons be confined to that one genre.

Modifié par sinosleep, 20 septembre 2010 - 04:28 .

[swn32]

Because the stasis bug is imba, whereas claymore tricking isn't. Thats the only difference. And for the last time, guns fire straight ahead where they are pointing, if you have any clue as to how guns work (even in games).

You can also release a charged GPS shot while sprinting (now don't tell me thats intended too).

Modifié par swn32, 20 septembre 2010 - 04:38 .

[sinosleep]

And a dragon punch should end with ryu in the air and not stop before his feet leave the ground and combo straight into a fireball. It's an animation, not newton's laws of gravity. Clearly neither of us is going to change our minds so I'm just going to agree to disagree. I think it's no different than undocumented, yet genre standard, animation skipping in fighting games. You clearly don't think that's the case. And no amount of retarded trope linking is going to change that. 

Modifié par sinosleep, 20 septembre 2010 - 04:40 .

[swn32]

Your comparison to fighting games is just ridiculous. And last time i checked it was possible to uppercut someone without having to leave the ground.

Also since when has shooting sideways out of a gun become a genre standard for shooters (since you are comparing the two)?

Modifié par swn32, 20 septembre 2010 - 04:45 .

[sinosleep]

Even though the move specifically requires that you wind up in the air? A dragon punch is SUPPOSED to be a jumping uppercut, but you can cut off the animation (as you can in many fighting games) and combo into something else before he leaves the ground. Same thing goes for fireballs (which are supposed to have a set delay from when you fire off the projectile to when you can do something else) but you can cut that animation short if you are quick enough as well. Point being, the animation  DOESN'T need to sync perfectly, all the player has to know is that it can be cut off while retaining full benefits. Where the gun is due to the animation being cut off is entirely irrelevant.

Modifié par sinosleep, 20 septembre 2010 - 04:47 .

[swn32]

I'm not here to argue against animation cancelling. They have their role in gaming. I gave a few example of how it can be used even in shooters earlier. But the reload tricking is not a suitable candidate and its nothing more than a bug.



There are many such bugs. Take the geth plasma shotgun, it normally has a refire time of 1 second. But if you fire a charged shot and melee simultaneously (shot still fires straight ahead) you can fire a followup shot immediately after the melee animation. You can't write them off as intended features, rather they are minor bugs the devs did not care to fix because its a single player game and these bugs only benefit the player if they decide to exploit it.

[sinosleep]

Like I said earlier, we may as well just agree to disagree cause I'm not buying what you're selling and you're doing the same to me. I don't know jack about any GPS related bugs (don't use that particular weapon) so I don't really know the circumstances surrounding it. What you described certainly sounds like a bug and I'd love to hear dev feedback on it.

As for it being a single player game, if something gets ****ed about enough or gets deemed enough of an issue it can be patched. Just look at the shield bubble in Dragon Age. Most everyone on the forums agreed it was HORRENDOUSLY overpowered, and low and behold it got patched.

If there aren't any patches coming with regards to DLC I'd put far more stock into the fact that it's DLC than I would into the fact it's a single player game. The devs have repeatedly spoken out about how much of a pain in the ass it is to patch DLC, so I'd think if anything is the reason for not patching is not player self control, it's simply a problem with the fact that it's DLC. I mean just look at how long it took them to fix Bring Down The Sky for Mass Effect 1. There's clearly something up with patching or editing DLC.

Modifié par sinosleep, 20 septembre 2010 - 05:08 .

[godlike13]

Are u saying the reload trick was intentional?