528 réponses à ce sujet

[Dr. Megaverse]

In my mind the largest impedances to revolutionary new technological gains are power supply and resources.

With that in mind when you apply Mass Effect's technology to the above limitations...you pretty much clear up the former, and we can infer the second is also solved.  We can infer that the resource issue is solved from the codex entries on Earth and mass accelerators.  To me it's more realistic, and logical, that with many more planets to gain resources from and Eezo for power a weapons main limitation would be heat. 

That being said, I really felt that Mass Effect had a bit more versimilitude for having unlimited ammo and simply applying a heat penalty to check your rate of fire.  I understand the idea and the motivations behind ME2's descision to go with the "clip" system and add an extra element of difficulty.  In roleplaying terms though everytime I fire my weapon in ME and think about the codex entries on how it all works, I feel much more "in the future" than I do in ME2. 

This is not to say ME2 isn't wonderful and equally on par overall with ME, just that this particular aspect of ME speaks to me more than ME2. 

Modifié par Dr. Megaverse, 23 septembre 2010 - 10:21 .

[Ares Caesar]

I've actually got an article I've been writing about this, in a day or two once I've got it cleaned up, I'll post it here.



Not so much for "realism" issues, simply to create more dynamic gameplay options, and also to really help those who stink at shooter games and have trouble with the shooter classes (a lot of the people who DONT play games I've gotten interested in Mass Effect).



I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels that way though, because now I'm more motivated to finish a lot of the "constructive criticisms" I've come up with.



I fully intend on sending them to the developers, and all criticisms I dont believe would necessarily change the game so much so that those who like the current system would care that much, and those who loved the older systems or want a more "realistic" alternative will have them. (Many issues beyond just the "heat sink vs thermal clip" debate)





LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR, I would NOT want to remove the thermal clip system either, simply reintroduce the heat sink system in conjunction with the thermal clip system (a DPS vs Total Damage type of system and tradeoff)

[archurban]

unlimited? do you want just damn shooting spree? it's not fun at all. realistic or not, limited ammo gives you more strategy, and the way of survival as a plan. I guess that you don't want to think nothing at all during playing a game, huh? so I guess that you can't play metro 2033 because you feel always very limited ammo. it's not just for mass effect 2. it is applied to the whole first person shooter game as well. it's strategy, and way you have to play.

[Dr. Megaverse]

archurban wrote...

unlimited? do you want just damn shooting spree? it's not fun at all. realistic or not, limited ammo gives you more strategy, and the way of survival as a plan. I guess that you don't want to think nothing at all during playing a game, huh? so I guess that you can't play metro 2033 because you feel always very limited ammo. it's not just for mass effect 2. it is applied to the whole first person shooter game as well. it's strategy, and way you have to play.

Predictable.

Did you forgest the heat penalty and the loss of accuracy?  Those are both things you have to manage.  As a matter of fact I don't remember the last time I PERSONALLY shot my weapon all the way to overheat, except maybe a sniper rifle.  So I'm not standing around washing the walls with bullets, and your assumption that I am just goes to show that you'd really rather spend time insulting someone you don't know, that taking place in a constructive discussion.

You will henceforth be ignored.  <_<

[The Spamming Troll]

id like a combination of the two as well. it seems like an easy switch to me too.

1. id start with ME1s overheat system. i really liked having a different ammo system in ME1 then most other shooters overheating was basically reloading so it worked fine for me. i really liked the fact that i didnt have to search for spare ammo. its a video game, i shouldnt need to search for ammo for my pistol, unless im running from zombies(or metro 2033 maybe).

2. i would make a switch to heat sincs tho. to allow for quicker shooting and overheating problems, i would convert heat sincs into instant weapon cooldowns that can be inserted into the weapon to instantly cool it. heat sincs would be carrier much like medigel. they could be upgraded. soldier probably would carry more of them. stuff like that.

dont those two things seem like an ideal split between the two weapon versions? id really like overheating to make a come back becasue it gave ME1s shooting a certain "feel" to it. its actually quite interesting playing ME1 and not looking for ammo or worrying about reloading and your ammo count. which i dont think we need to worry about ammo count. weapons like the widow or vindicator with low ammo counts isnt exactly threatening in a sense bioware thinks they are portaying. all it means is i have to kill 1 or 2 enemies with the hand canon, which is rare in itself.

id also like to see weapon mod slots return as well. something more like scopes, silencers, barrels and what not. i dont need a huge inventory of weapons, i just wnat to make one weapon that works for me. but thats alot to get into. first things first.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 23 septembre 2010 - 11:49 .

[Pocketgb]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

id like a combination of the two as well. it seems like an easy switch to me too.

1. id start with ME1s overheat system. i really liked having a different ammo system in ME1 then most other shooters overheating was basically reloading so it worked fine for me. i really liked the fact that i didnt have to search for spare ammo. its a video game, i shouldnt need to search for ammo for my pistol, unless im running from zombies(or metro 2033 maybe).

2. i would make a switch to heat sincs tho. to allow for quicker shooting and overheating problems, i would convert heat sincs into instant weapon cooldowns that can be inserted into the weapon to instantly cool it. heat sincs would be carrier much like medigel. they could be upgraded. soldier probably would carry more of them. stuff like that.

dont those two things seem like an ideal split between the two weapon versions? id really like overheating to make a come back becasue it gave ME1s shooting a certain "feel" to it. its actually quite interesting playing ME1 and not looking for ammo or worrying about reloading and your ammo count. which i dont think we need to worry about ammo count. weapons like the widow or vindicator with low ammo counts isnt exactly threatening in a sense bioware thinks they are portaying. all it means is i have to kill 1 or 2 enemies with the hand canon, which is rare in itself.

id also like to see weapon mod slots return as well. something more like scopes, silencers, barrels and what not. i dont need a huge inventory of weapons, i just wnat to make one weapon that works for me. but thats alot to get into. first things first.

It's a tricky situation, one that's really difficult to balance. You have to make it so whether the player is overheating then using a heatsink or moderating his barrage and keeping his gun cool that he's not ever disadvantaging himself.

[DOGGEH84]

Yeah as fun as unlimited ammo was. I prefer the limited ammo. That being said..its not like there isn't enough to pick up on the way. Having limited ammo makes you(it does for me) use different weapons. Find myself switching weapons constantly for different combat situations. Saving my assault rifle for more intence fire fights.

[Elite Midget]

The limited ammo didn't feel limited at all in ME2. I rarely ran out of ammo wile doing an Insanity run as a Sentinel. If anything you could fire more shots per second in ME2 than in ME1 without suffering any pentalties. Not to mention that everyone you shot at tended to drop termal clips and that evenmy ships, like the Collectors, loved carrying ammo and heavy ammo for you to use.

Do the Collectors even 'use' Heavy Weapons?

Heat Sinks made far more sense than Collectors and Geth carrying ammo for your weapons and have them lying around everywhere for you to use.

Modifié par Elite Midget, 24 septembre 2010 - 12:38 .

[Pocketgb]

The Collector Assassin's use Particle Beams.

[Elite Midget]

I pretend they're really laser beams from their eyes.



Their eyes are just begging to shoot lasers out of them!

[Atmosfear3]

If by unlimited ammo you mean you have a never ending supply of reserve ammo, plausible and probably would not affect gameplay in the slightest. Most good players will never run out of ammo for their weapons if they use different weapons and their powers wisely.



Unless you mean unlimited ammo like in ME1 where you can just hold down the trigger and spray through an entire level without ever having to lay off the trigger, that would be utterly retarded, unbalanced, and not in the slightest bit realistic.

[Pocketgb]

Atmosfear3 wrote...

If by unlimited ammo you mean you have a never ending supply of reserve ammo, plausible and probably would not affect gameplay in the slightest. Most good players will never run out of ammo for their weapons if they use different weapons and their powers wisely.

Unless you mean unlimited ammo like in ME1 where you can just hold down the trigger and spray through an entire level without ever having to lay off the trigger, that would be utterly retarded, unbalanced, and not in the slightest bit realistic.

For ME1, that's where the overheat mechanic was 'supposed' to moderate it. As it is, it's no different than having to reload your gun, and upgrades essentially made your 'clip' bigger.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 24 septembre 2010 - 12:50 .

[Quething]

DOGGEH84 wrote...

Yeah as fun as unlimited ammo was. I prefer the limited ammo. That being said..its not like there isn't enough to pick up on the way. Having limited ammo makes you(it does for me) use different weapons. Find myself switching weapons constantly for different combat situations. Saving my assault rifle for more intence fire fights.

Artificial ammo restrictions are a horrible way to enforce weapon switching (and a horrible way to force aggressive gameplay, too, just to preempt the inevitable "prevents camping" argument). We should switch weapons because it's smart to switch weapons, not because we're forced to by an arbitrary gameplay mechanic. That's like saying "nobody is riding the dark, slow, smelly subway, so... we'll tear up all the roads so they have no choice!" No. Wrong. Error. You want people to ride the subway, you make it faster and brighter and hire some maintenance workers. You don't massacre some completely unrelated, perfectly functional system to create artificial travel restrictions. You fix the thing that's wrong, you don't mangle everything else in an effort to make it look good by comparison.

Guns, same way. You want players to move forward, going from one bit of cover to the next? You make cover fragile and teach the AI to flank. If cover is too useful, you make cover less useful. Messing with people's resources so they have to run to the next ammo pickup doesn't actually fix the cover problem, it just breaks the guns too. Likewise, you want players to switch between their equipped weapons as the battlefield situation changes? You make each gun extremely specialized so it's distinctly more useful than its peers in one context and distinctly less useful in others. If players are sticking too much with one weapon, you make the other weapons worth using. Messing with people's resources so they have to switch guns just to conserve bullets doesn't actually fix the "one gun for everything" problem, it just breaks the weapon system more.

Sad thing is, they already *did* do a pretty good job of that, at least if you're not packing DLC, so at least in weapon-switching terms, the artificial ammo restriction is vestigial on top of being obnoxious. Using the Scimitar against a guy ten meters away on a balcony is silly, nobody does it. Using the Widow against a guy on the other side of the bench you're ducking behind is silly, nobody does it. Using the Tempest against Tarak's gunship is silly - people probably do do it anyway, but they're making the game hard on themselves for no reason. I have never run out of ammo on any weapon ever in this game, and I do not pay attention to ammo conservation at all; I simply match weapons to the range and defense of my enemies, because the game plays better that way, and trip over the million and one heat sinks that lay every ten feet to refill before I even spend half my magazines for any one gun. The thermal clip system isn't doing anything to my gameplay experience whatsoever. Damaging the hell out of my roleplaying experience, though.

Modifié par Quething, 24 septembre 2010 - 12:55 .

[StowyMcStowstow]

Atmosfear3 wrote...

If by unlimited ammo you mean you have a never ending supply of reserve ammo, plausible and probably would not affect gameplay in the slightest. Most good players will never run out of ammo for their weapons if they use different weapons and their powers wisely.

Unless you mean unlimited ammo like in ME1 where you can just hold down the trigger and spray through an entire level without ever having to lay off the trigger, that would be utterly retarded, unbalanced, and not in the slightest bit realistic.

If I recall correctly, you couldn't do that, even with the best gun and upgrades. And didn't your aim start to go wild after holding down the trigger for too long? And anyone who  would fire their gun until it overheated is pretty much an idiot for not knowing how to lay off of the trigger for half a second to let it cool down.

[Cuddlezarro]

StowyMcStowstow wrote...

Atmosfear3 wrote...

If by unlimited ammo you mean you have a never ending supply of reserve ammo, plausible and probably would not affect gameplay in the slightest. Most good players will never run out of ammo for their weapons if they use different weapons and their powers wisely.

Unless you mean unlimited ammo like in ME1 where you can just hold down the trigger and spray through an entire level without ever having to lay off the trigger, that would be utterly retarded, unbalanced, and not in the slightest bit realistic.

If I recall correctly, you couldn't do that, even with the best gun and upgrades. And didn't your aim start to go wild after holding down the trigger for too long? And anyone who  would fire their gun until it overheated is pretty much an idiot for not knowing how to lay off of the trigger for half a second to let it cool down.

once I got master Marksmen my pistol NEVER overheated I could literally turn that on and fire all day long since the skill would recharge before the effect wore off

[Quething]

StowyMcStowstow wrote...

If I recall correctly, you couldn't do that, even with the best gun and upgrades. And didn't your aim start to go wild after holding down the trigger for too long? And anyone who  would fire their gun until it overheated is pretty much an idiot for not knowing how to lay off of the trigger for half a second to let it cool down.

Around level 49-50 you could build an assault rifle that fires forever (2x Scram Rail + Snowblind rounds on an AR with good shots-before-overheat). Of course, around level 49-50 a soldier can take a hit from a thresher maw without flinching and a vanguard can spam her powers as fast as she can hit her hotkeys, but God forbid we let the baneful hobgoblin of Context sneak into a discussion of a single gameplay mechanic's balance and overall legitimacy.

[Elite Midget]

Well, to be fair... In ME2 I never ran out of ammo as a soldier while spamming the Revenant. Getting that AR basically negated using anything but it. Maybe a shotgun to blow away the melee enemies but even than the Revenant could spam away just fine against them. I could literally keep shooting at things non-stop til they died with it and not even come close to running low on ammo.

[The Spamming Troll]

Quething wrote...

Artificial ammo restrictions are a horrible way to enforce weapon switching (and a horrible way to force aggressive gameplay, too, just to preempt the inevitable "prevents camping" argument). We should switch weapons because it's smart to switch weapons, not because we're forced to by an arbitrary gameplay mechanic. That's like saying "nobody is riding the dark, slow, smelly subway, so... we'll tear up all the roads so they have no choice!" No. Wrong. Error. You want people to ride the subway, you make it faster and brighter and hire some maintenance workers. You don't massacre some completely unrelated, perfectly functional system to create artificial travel restrictions. You fix the thing that's wrong, you don't mangle everything else in an effort to make it look good by comparison.

Guns, same way. You want players to move forward, going from one bit of cover to the next? You make cover fragile and teach the AI to flank. If cover is too useful, you make cover less useful. Messing with people's resources so they have to run to the next ammo pickup doesn't actually fix the cover problem, it just breaks the guns too. Likewise, you want players to switch between their equipped weapons as the battlefield situation changes? You make each gun extremely specialized so it's distinctly more useful than its peers in one context and distinctly less useful in others. If players are sticking too much with one weapon, you make the other weapons worth using. Messing with people's resources so they have to switch guns just to conserve bullets doesn't actually fix the "one gun for everything" problem, it just breaks the weapon system more.

Sad thing is, they already *did* do a pretty good job of that, at least if you're not packing DLC, so at least in weapon-switching terms, the artificial ammo restriction is vestigial on top of being obnoxious. Using the Scimitar against a guy ten meters away on a balcony is silly, nobody does it. Using the Widow against a guy on the other side of the bench you're ducking behind is silly, nobody does it. Using the Tempest against Tarak's gunship is silly - people probably do do it anyway, but they're making the game hard on themselves for no reason. I have never run out of ammo on any weapon ever in this game, and I do not pay attention to ammo conservation at all; I simply match weapons to the range and defense of my enemies, because the game plays better that way, and trip over the million and one heat sinks that lay every ten feet to refill before I even spend half my magazines for any one gun. The thermal clip system isn't doing anything to my gameplay experience whatsoever. Damaging the hell out of my roleplaying experience, though.

exactly the way i feel about it.

[LatinBoi1da]

Well to be fair unlimited ammo isn't all that realistic either. If I remember correctly the codex entry from ME1 said that it was just a brick of some kind of metal that has pieces torn away as it is shot so it would, at some point, need to be replenished. Even if you had energy weapons that would also need to be replenished; nothing is truly limitless. But if I had to choose as to which system I like better I'd take the clip over the overheating aspect.

[Whatever42]

I like ammo clips. It forces movement on the battlefield.

[Quething]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I like ammo clips. It forces movement on the battlefield.

Damn I'm good.

[theelementslayer]

I loved the ammo system it made me do many things

-Use powers more often, not just use singularity and hold down the trigger till it was over then rinse and repeat.
-Make me pick my targets. Go for the big one or take out the small one and hope he drops a clip
-Switch weapons. One shot with the widow, one with the carnifax, both in the head and kills a collector on insanity
-Think about which weapon to bring. I love Kasumis SMG but sometimes Im going CQC and need CQC weapons like the tempest. Or same with the predator or the carnifax
-Ammo powers. In the first game they didnt do anything except kill the enemy faster. Really it helped yes, but sometimes I forgot and well didnt really matter because I have unlimited ammo. I would just hold down the button
-Makes me pick my shots. As an infiltrator I want headshots, all the time, unless a chest shot will kill, most usually doesnt on insanity though. With unlimited ammo I would take the shot anyways, if I missed big deal. In ME2 I would make sure I would hit because if I missed huge deal. I only had 14 shots.

Bioware if your listening, please keep the ammo system, please.

[Whatever42]

Quething wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I like ammo clips. It forces movement on the battlefield.

Damn I'm good.

Yes, there are other ways to do that, as you pointed out but they didn't implement them. But in ME1, just being able to hold down the button and spray bullets everywhere nonstop was ridiculous. And even if they nerfed it so you couldn't do that, the overheat drove me just as batty. 

[The Spamming Troll]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Quething wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I like ammo clips. It forces movement on the battlefield.

Damn I'm good.

Yes,
there are other ways to do that, as you pointed out but they didn't
implement them. But in ME1, just being able to hold down the button and
spray bullets everywhere nonstop was ridiculous. And even if they nerfed
it so you couldn't do that, the overheat drove me just as batty. 

im hoping its not an exact replica of ME1s weaponplay, but one based around an overheating conept would be really unique, and persanlly i miss it.

the overheat is exactly like reloading, i dont see how there any different in terms of reloading/overheating. overheating can be an easier method of gun play becasue theres no need for reloading. i just think the overheating was a great way to show variety in gunplay mechanics. it doesnt always have to be 5.56mm or buckshot. other then scare tactic shooters, is looking for ammo all that important to you? let me remind you its a video game of of galactic extinction, but you still want to look for ammo.

theelementslayer wrote...

I loved the ammo system it made me do many things

-Use powers more often, not just use singularity and hold down the trigger till it was over then rinse and repeat.
-Make me pick my targets. Go for the big one or take out the small one and hope he drops a clip
-Switch weapons. One shot with the widow, one with the carnifax, both in the head and kills a collector on insanity
-Think about which weapon to bring. I love Kasumis SMG but sometimes Im going CQC and need CQC weapons like the tempest. Or same with the predator or the carnifax
-Ammo powers. In the first game they didnt do anything except kill the enemy faster. Really it helped yes, but sometimes I forgot and well didnt really matter because I have unlimited ammo. I would just hold down the button
-Makes me pick my shots. As an infiltrator I want headshots, all the time, unless a chest shot will kill, most usually doesnt on insanity though. With unlimited ammo I would take the shot anyways, if I missed big deal. In ME2 I would make sure I would hit because if I missed huge deal. I only had 14 shots.

Bioware if your listening, please keep the ammo system, please.

really? im just curiouse....

-i dont think ME3 will have friction material X mods.
-you hope enemies will drop clips after you kill them? finding ammo clips on the ground is as easy as getting in bed with liara.
-im just assuming something here, but you probably arent using the carnifax if you have the widow.
- weapon variety, nothing to do with ammo counts.
- ammo powers are awesome, nobody is saying they should be gone in ME3.
-you want head shots with an infiltrator thanks to slow mo tim lapse. you dont have 14 shots, you have an unlimited supply of ammo, your just stuck on the fact that 14 is all you can carry at one time. honestly, how often do you wish you even had 15 shots. you always have atleast 8 rounds of sniper shot, which is all you should need with the infiltrator.

someone mentioned something about ammo clips from ME1 being small
cinder blocks which is exactly what they were. easily replacable and
lasted something like a bazillion rounds. what more could you ask for?

[Whatever42]

The Spamming Troll wrote...
the overheat is exactly like reloading, i dont see how there any different in terms of reloading/overheating. overheating can be an easier method of gun play becasue theres no need for reloading. i just think the overheating was a great way to show variety in gunplay mechanics. it doesnt always have to be 5.56mm or buckshot. other then scare tactic shooters, is looking for ammo all that important to you? let me remind you its a video game of of galactic extinction, but you still want to look for ammo.

No, not exactly. In ME2 I could fire at any rate until I was out of ammo and then get more or swap guns. In ME1, I had watch my sustained rate of fire or my weapon would seize up for several seconds. 

I'm not married to ammo - its not a philosophical stand I'm taking here. Its just that the overheat mechanism in ME1 just felt very unsatisfying and even annoying to me. And I don't as a rule play shooters so its not that I'm simply used to ammo. 

Maybe its this - they can't just let me shoot non-stop with a sniper rifle. In ME2, I have to stop and pull out another gun eventually or get ammo. Getting additional ammo is doing something. Switching guns and continuing to shoot is doing something.  In ME1, I just have to slow my rate of fire. I sit around doing nothing for a few seconds waiting for my heat to drop. Or, I get heat sinks and just fire non-stop, which is overpowering. ME1 in insanity as a soldier with with good gear was a joke. I just sprayed gunfire non-stop until everything was dead. 

Again, I'm merely trying to describe how I felt with the system. I know mileage will vary.