Lumikki wrote...
I do get what you say, I just don't fully agree with you.
kalle90 wrote...
Lumikki wrote...
Yeah, air is very bad termal conduction. Also it's about mass and temperature what needs to be cool down. If you want cool pistol in 5 second, it would require droping it in something very cold and massive with good termal conduction.Atmosfear3 wrote...
Hey guys can you explain why my pot, that just boiled a gallon of water is still hot even though I only just turned off the heat 5 seconds ago?
See what I did there?
Cooling down thermal clips, lol
But you don't need reality of physical laws, if you say it's magic.
Or sci-fi. There could be all sorts of crazy cryo technology to cool the clips down.
You could simply give Shepard (and everyone else) a hip/wrist thermal clip container with some cool down tech. It would hold some spare clips you use when the others are cooling down.
And do we really want to talk about common sense? Like it's been said many times:
- Why doesn't everyone use clips?
- How can I get them from collectors?
- How come a single clip I pick up give bullets to every weapon?
- How can I reload a thermal clip while it still has ammo?
- How come the clip heats up after the same amount of shots no matter how frequently I shoot?
- Why do the clips look like cheap plastic tubes in-game but in cutscenes they are orange orbs?
- How ME1 had weapons with basically infinite ammo and near instant cooldown and then the technology got worse?
But yeah it truly feels like the weapon technology from ME2 is taken from today and not the future
I agree the video above nails it, pretty much exactly what I've been hoping for. Take a look at it Bioware
kalle90 wrote...
- Why doesn't everyone use clips? - I don't really understand what you mean by this. Everyone in ME2 uses thermal clips, even enemies.
- How can I get them from collectors? - You have a point here. However this is gameplay superceding lore. How else would you replenish your ammo stock if collector missions had no thermal clips? This is perfectly acceptable to me.
- How come a single clip I pick up give bullets to every weapon? - Could be the clips you pickup are simply containers that have multiple heatsinks inside them. Makes sense to me anyways.
- How can I reload a thermal clip while it still has ammo? - Same way you can reload a modern gun even if it still has ammo. You just lose whatever ammo was left in the clip. This isn't reflected in-game for obvious reasons most other shooters don't have this realistic mechanic. Again, gameplay superceding lore/realism.
- How come the clip heats up after the same amount of shots no matter how frequently I shoot? - Gameplay superceding lore/realism.
- Why do the clips look like cheap plastic tubes in-game but in cutscenes they are orange orbs? - See the third reply
- How ME1 had weapons with basically infinite ammo and near instant cooldown and then the technology got worse? - Spectre weapons maybe. The weapons that were not Spectre X, assuming just stock (no mods) tend to overheat fairly quick. They were perhaps the most realistic in terms of heat generation to rounds down range. Still, it was a terrible system and mechanic.
Evil_Weasel wrote...
casedawgz wrote...
You DON'T have to manage them though. By the time you get 3/4 through the game you're shooting forever, with no loss to accuracy through upgrades. Its utterly gamebreaking. It's like if there was an "infinite thermal clips" upgrade in ME2. You'd just shoot the mattock forever and the game would be ruined.
Man I am so tired of telling people this, no one wants the endless bullet spam and 100% accuracy from assualt rifles, it was unbalanced. We want guns that over heat if fired too long. We want guns that work like they did up to the first half of the game, befor Spectre Master gear was obtained with double frictionless matireals were added with polonium 7 rounds.
That was unbalancde, no one wants that, get it through your thick skulls, we want the guns to over heat after fireing for a couple seconds. Also, if we can fire a lot, so can the enimies. We dont want a switch fliped and have the game as is now with no reloading and have the ability to
"JUST SHOOT THE MATTOCK FOREVER"
that is not it, we want a balanced game, with guns that dont need to be fed clips or they quit working the second you run out. Stop useing hyperbole it just makes you look like an idot. If you really think thats what people are saying and your not being an ass, then you are an idot.
Most people are in favor of the hybrid system from this videoWilliam Adama wrote...
Watch this video, I like this idea alot for the next game:
I am in favor of this idea, I like it, it will make many of us happy, in fact if it were a mod I would use it and enjoy the game more. Now please stop assumeing we want to carry around an automatic weapon with the fire rate of a water hose and imagine like us that we want something more akin to how the base assualt rifle in ME1 worked at level 1.
Yeah, I don't think I change my mind often, not because it's not possible, but because we have different view point to look situation. You have some nice point in you arguments, but my problem is that you base them often more to games fictional lore than actual reality of natures physical laws. In my opinion too fictional feels like magic, because it's lost the reality. Yes, some of the ME2 combat stuff did not also make much sense, but it's not really breaking physical laws (except ammo powers), more like behavior laws. In simple way sayed, you use ME1 lore as excuse to support what you want. I use physical laws as excuse to support what I want. Also you are right we can argue as much we want, but I don't think it change anyones opinions here.kalle90 wrote...
Point is that those things in game, plus most others, don't leave me asking "why" and "how". Thermal clips do because the game doesn't even try to make them sensible - Not only it conflicts with what ME1 had (superior technology), but the codex and gameplay of ME2 also conflict each otherLumikki wrote...
I do get what you say, I just don't fully agree with you.
And it's obvious that doesn't change. But with the video...
... I don't think there's any point for me to continue in this thread. That is 99% what I'm hoping for and if it doesn't happen for ME3 it doesn't happen.
Modifié par Lumikki, 10 octobre 2010 - 06:26 .
Atmosfear3 wrote...
gameplay superceding lore/realism.
Modifié par kalle90, 10 octobre 2010 - 06:58 .
That's the difference between us. ME serie would not be ME without ME1 AND ME2. Meaning lore isn't just one game, it's both games, even if there is conflicts. You can't ignore half the lore, just because you don't like other game.kalle90 wrote...
@Lumikki. Well IMO the established world is the most important thing. ME wouldn't be ME without ME1 and changing stuff with lacking reasons isn't good IMO even if it means more real world realism or better gameplay (when things could be done in other ways). ME1 wasn't actually based on magic either. No series stays the same, but it's still a shame Bioware wasn't that happy with ME1 when they so drummed their "this will be a series about continuity".
Modifié par Lumikki, 10 octobre 2010 - 08:28 .
Modifié par yowave, 10 octobre 2010 - 08:29 .
Zurcior wrote...
There was no "lacking reason". The reason for changing the ammo system has been explained. Besides that, if you pay attention to letters from the Illusive Man concerning the DLC weapons like the Mattock, he explained that the Mattock was modified to take thermal clips. Meaning that it is possible that not every weapon in the galaxy was converted. There was no retcon. Understand that before posting any more comments.
Ryzaki wrote...
Zurcior wrote...
There was no "lacking reason". The reason for changing the ammo system has been explained. Besides that, if you pay attention to letters from the Illusive Man concerning the DLC weapons like the Mattock, he explained that the Mattock was modified to take thermal clips. Meaning that it is possible that not every weapon in the galaxy was converted. There was no retcon. Understand that before posting any more comments.
So those colonists didn't magically drop clips they shouldn't have had?
Jacob's Loyalty Mission. Full Stop. No retcon huh?
And no, they shouldn't of had thermal clips. A wizard rip them from their bodies so you can have more ammo.
Zurcior wrote...
kalle90 wrote...
Lumikki wrote...
Yeah, air is very bad termal conduction. Also it's about mass and temperature what needs to be cool down. If you want cool pistol in 5 second, it would require droping it in something very cold and massive with good termal conduction.Atmosfear3 wrote...
Hey guys can you explain why my pot, that just boiled a gallon of water is still hot even though I only just turned off the heat 5 seconds ago?
See what I did there?
Cooling down thermal clips, lol
But you don't need reality of physical laws, if you say it's magic.
Or sci-fi. There could be all sorts of crazy cryo technology to cool the clips down.
You could simply give Shepard (and everyone else) a hip/wrist thermal clip container with some cool down tech. It would hold some spare clips you use when the others are cooling down.
And do we really want to talk about common sense? Like it's been said many times:
- Why doesn't everyone use clips?
- How can I get them from collectors?
- How come a single clip I pick up give bullets to every weapon?
- How can I reload a thermal clip while it still has ammo?
- How come the clip heats up after the same amount of shots no matter how frequently I shoot?
- Why do the clips look like cheap plastic tubes in-game but in cutscenes they are orange orbs?
- How ME1 had weapons with basically infinite ammo and near instant cooldown and then the technology got worse?
But yeah it truly feels like the weapon technology from ME2 is taken from today and not the future
I agree the video above nails it, pretty much exactly what I've been hoping for. Take a look at it Bioware
Do you have any idea what happens to materials that are rapidly cooled after being rapidly heated? It gets degraded. The thermal clips would become useless. You can't cool something that hot down without breaking it. That's basic physics.
Modifié par Embrosil, 11 octobre 2010 - 07:31 .
TomY90 wrote...
i do agree its like a step back technology wise with having like ammo clips but does improve gameplay makes it more involving and be more strategic when firing.
This is true especially in ME1 if you got a good enough gun with good enough heat sinks etc you could literally hold shoot forever without overheating (its funny etc but not engaging to be honest)
I dont think they could go back in any form to ME1 system because it would be a step back gameplay wise (however i do think in a way some guns could have unlimited ammo like a pistol which that is normally the case with quite a few games that the pistol has unlimited ammo so your never defenceless
Modifié par Embrosil, 11 octobre 2010 - 07:33 .
Lumikki wrote...
Sure, if you have smaller enough energy source for it. Meaning, you need energy to cool something down fast.kalle90 wrote...
Or sci-fi. There could be all sorts of crazy cryo technology to cool the clips down.
You could simply give Shepard (and everyone else) a hip/wrist thermal clip container with some cool down tech. It would hold some spare clips you use when the others are cooling down.Sure, because "today" feels better. If you want magic just say so, no need to explain anything.But yeah it truly feels like the weapon technology from ME2 is taken from today and not the future
It's not really about today, it's about breaking physical laws. Material just doesn't come from nothingness.
Modifié par Embrosil, 11 octobre 2010 - 07:47 .
Modifié par Lumikki, 11 octobre 2010 - 09:38 .
Embrosil wrote...
TomY90 wrote...
i do agree its like a step back technology wise with having like ammo clips but does improve gameplay makes it more involving and be more strategic when firing.
This is true especially in ME1 if you got a good enough gun with good enough heat sinks etc you could literally hold shoot forever without overheating (its funny etc but not engaging to be honest)
I dont think they could go back in any form to ME1 system because it would be a step back gameplay wise (however i do think in a way some guns could have unlimited ammo like a pistol which that is normally the case with quite a few games that the pistol has unlimited ammo so your never defenceless
Yet again. What is more strategic when you have a sniper with 10 rounds in his sniper rifle? What is strategic on having to use SMG or pistol to shoot that far away enemy? And the most important question, what is strategic on running in front of enemy guns to collect ammo NO ONE ELSE in game needs? It is not strategy, it is stupidity. Since many of others here like to compare scifi to our time, show me any sniper today, who would bring a sniper rifle, a pistol, an SMG and a grenate launcher and he would make sure, he has only 10 rounds for his sniper rifle so in one moment he MUST use other weapons to kill an enemy. I really doubt you would find one in any army on Earth.
Modifié par JRKnight, 11 octobre 2010 - 09:05 .
Zurcior wrote...
That was for the sake of gameplay, and you know it.
Lumikki wrote...
That's the difference between us. ME serie would not be ME without ME1 AND ME2. Meaning lore isn't just one game, it's both games, even if there is conflicts. You can't ignore half the lore, just because you don't like other game.kalle90 wrote...
@Lumikki. Well IMO the established world is the most important thing. ME wouldn't be ME without ME1 and changing stuff with lacking reasons isn't good IMO even if it means more real world realism or better gameplay (when things could be done in other ways). ME1 wasn't actually based on magic either. No series stays the same, but it's still a shame Bioware wasn't that happy with ME1 when they so drummed their "this will be a series about continuity".
Lumikki wrote...
Magic is anything what can't be explained by science (teories).
Material stil just doesn't come from nothingness. Because material can change to energy and energy to material, but nothing can't change to anything. Meaning where is all ammos (bullets) comming on unlimited ammo situation. Because damage done by two collision of objects is relative to size of they mass. Less mass, less damage.
Many stuff what exist in science fiction are based teories what could be possible based science, but can't be proven to be true or false by todays science. Point is they are still based science teories, not in magic.
Faster than light teories.
Modifié par Embrosil, 11 octobre 2010 - 02:08 .
JRKnight wrote...
Embrosil wrote...
TomY90 wrote...
i do agree its like a step back technology wise with having like ammo clips but does improve gameplay makes it more involving and be more strategic when firing.
This is true especially in ME1 if you got a good enough gun with good enough heat sinks etc you could literally hold shoot forever without overheating (its funny etc but not engaging to be honest)
I dont think they could go back in any form to ME1 system because it would be a step back gameplay wise (however i do think in a way some guns could have unlimited ammo like a pistol which that is normally the case with quite a few games that the pistol has unlimited ammo so your never defenceless
Yet again. What is more strategic when you have a sniper with 10 rounds in his sniper rifle? What is strategic on having to use SMG or pistol to shoot that far away enemy? And the most important question, what is strategic on running in front of enemy guns to collect ammo NO ONE ELSE in game needs? It is not strategy, it is stupidity. Since many of others here like to compare scifi to our time, show me any sniper today, who would bring a sniper rifle, a pistol, an SMG and a grenate launcher and he would make sure, he has only 10 rounds for his sniper rifle so in one moment he MUST use other weapons to kill an enemy. I really doubt you would find one in any army on Earth.
Here's a much better question; The battlefield is a constantly changing, constantly evolving place. New threats appear and must be challenged and delt with. Question is: What kind of soldier gets deployed who can't even meet and respond to the basic changes in combat? Hell, how can the other guys in this FNG's unit trust him to watch their backs and keep 'em alive no matter the situation? Whether providing overwatch for a squad operating on the ground; or breaching and clearing a structure where CQB is likely.
Just as a matter of point, word of advise: Do some actually research and don't just assume you're right , cause well you're not.
Only times a sniper/marksman would be carrying 10 to 20 cartridges of ammunition really depends on the model of sniper rifle being used. Most of the time it would be bolt-action, that's either breach loaded or feed from an internal magazine, meaning each indiviidual cartridge would have to be hand loaded. Though internal magazines have a limited capacity, standered conventinal rifles its normally 5 to 8 counting the one round already sealed in the chamber.
Embrosil wrote...
And this relates to ME in what way? How does battlefield in ME changes? It is all the same. In ME2 it is even worse as it still the same linear corridor. And I really doubt any soldier would carry 3 or 4 guns, plus a heavy weapon to be able to adapt to a change on battlefield.
Yes, and what does todays marksman do when he runs out of ammo? Starts running across the battlefield to collect a new one? Hey sorry guys, I am out, just please stop shooting for a while, I need to collect that magazine that have just miracously appeared. Because that is how it works in ME2.
Modifié par Atmosfear3, 11 octobre 2010 - 03:48 .
Sure, ME universe "technology" seem to be build little bit around magic. I never sayed it would not be. I just don't like when game looks like science fiction game, but it's based so much in magic. It doesn't make much sense, like you allready showed multible ways. That's the problem, it doesn't make sense for science fiction game. So, some people like me would want more "technology" sense to games technology based items and not just be magic. Because if it would have little bit more science reality, it would feel better in my opinion. I don't ask explanation for bionics, because they are fully based on magic. If you say something is magic, I don't argue with you, because magic doesn't require any logical explanation. In the end it's every players taste as what they would want, nothing else.Embrosil wrote...
Lumikki wrote...
Magic is anything what can't be explained by science (teories).
Material stil just doesn't come from nothingness. Because material can change to energy and energy to material, but nothing can't change to anything. Meaning where is all ammos (bullets) comming on unlimited ammo situation. Because damage done by two collision of objects is relative to size of they mass. Less mass, less damage.
Many stuff what exist in science fiction are based teories what could be possible based science, but can't be proven to be true or false by todays science. Point is they are still based science teories, not in magic.
Faster than light teories.
So you have just admitted that the whole ME universe is a magic. Can you show me some element zero theories? Or some biotics theories? So why does one type of magic (unlimited ammo) bothers you and others do not? I for example find a good magic that Jack and others can run in vacuum nearly naked. And I find more real to have unlimited, or nearly unlimited ammo than having people walking naked in vacuum.
Modifié par Lumikki, 11 octobre 2010 - 04:33 .
Retour en haut