528 réponses à ce sujet

[kalle90]

I'd hope thermal clips were basically changeable heatsinks. Changing it allows you to shoot instantly without having to wait for weapon to cool down, plus fresh batteries have more power/accuracy. To make people use them weapons should overheat faster than they do in ME1



Agreed the ME1 style was more original, futuristic and allowed more customization

[Siegdrifa]

tonnactus wrote...

Kronner wrote...

No, the gameplay needs it. The ammo efficiency is important. Imagine Mattock or Viper with unlimited ammo.

Viper? I could do entire fights using just this weapon. Its easy to balance,high damaging weapons produce more heat
then those with lower damage.And the difference between the mattock and the revenant are not that big...
The revenant is basicly a mattock with unlimited ammo when it comes to damage alone.(or the mattock is a revenant with limited ammo for other classes then the soldier)

While it can appear to be a logical idea, like i said above in the game you meet situation where you need to consume more ressources to burst the ennemy. These situation are required to change the timing and difficulty of the encounter (i'm not debating if it's well done or not enough in ME2).
It's mean, at some time you will need to use 6 or 7 or more short with the widow or 50 / 70% of your ressources with the mattock.
If you generate heat proportionnaly to the fire power, it's mean your weapon don't adapt your need.
In situation A (normal ennemy showing up at normal rate) and in situation B (stronger ennemy showing at short rate) means you can't count on your strongest weapon to over come B. and in B situation, heat sink is a lot better than heat generation IF heat generation is based on fire power.

In a good gameplay mechanic (i don't care ammu or heat), you should be able to use your big god damn weapon to save your skin.
 I'm sure many people know this feeling, when they overcome a hard situation with their weapon, and thinking "aaaaah, this good old widow .... never let me down !" the weapon can be empty, but it served you right.

Now try to imagine situation B when your weapon is over heated too quicly " what i'm supposed to do ? spit at their faces ?!" (aka aliens 2) MY KINGDOME FOR A DAMN HEAT SINK !!!

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 24 septembre 2010 - 01:52 .

[Embrosil]

Kronner wrote...

This alone would not be enough. Level design or AI would have to be changed completly to prevent player from staying in a safe spot and just kill everyone without any danger. Unlimited ammo is a very bad idea IMHO. It was ridiculously bad in ME1.

Eh, what? Now you also stay in a safe spot and if out of ammo, switch to different weapon, or just leave team mates to deal with the threat. I do not know how you, but I find the idea to run in front of enemy guns to pick up ammo really retarded.

[Kronner]

The idea was to make players play more aggressively. If you find that retarded, fine.

[termokanden]

Embrosil wrote...

Eh, what? Now you also stay in a safe spot and if out of ammo, switch to different weapon, or just leave team mates to deal with the threat. I do not know how you, but I find the idea to run in front of enemy guns to pick up ammo really retarded.

It is. But the point is you don't even have to. You're forced to switch weapons sometimes, that's about it.

The idea was to make players play more aggressively. If you find that retarded, fine.

Running around the battlefield picking up clips while people are shooting at you is still stupid. But like I said, you don't have to do this.

If you want to force players to play more aggressively, make more aggressive enemies. Very simple. If they were more aggressive in general, you couldn't just sit behind a random crate and kill them one at a time.

Modifié par termokanden, 24 septembre 2010 - 01:54 .

[kregano]

Well, the devs tried doing a hybrid system (which is why it can turned on via coalesced.ini), but according to Christina Norman back on the old ME2 forums, the problem was that players would burn through clips, then get on their last clip and become dependent on the cooldown, instead of moving around and trying to get more clips/better position.



That said, I'm totally fine with the thermal clips, as I utterly hated the heat sinks in ME1. Who the hell would design weapons that have effectively unlimited ammo but can stop working if you are in a situation where you need to lay down lots of fire downrange and don't have anyone to support you?

[Whatever42]

termokanden wrote...

You have enough ammo in ME2 to do that anyway, even on insanity.

It would work well if the AI was tuned to be more aggressive. This should happen anyway I think. There are some tough fights on insanity, but in most of them you really can just stay back behind cover and kill enemies one at a time.

Oh and you always have infinite ammo with powers, so the problem actually already exists.

I don't want the same system as in ME1. I don't want a regular unimaginative ammo system either. I would like to see a fine-tuned overheating and modding system instead. But if I had to choose between the two existing systems, ME2 works best. I just want to make it clear that I still think it was lazy to just throw out the overheating system instead of balancing it.

They limit rate of fire on powers with the cooldown, which many people also find aggravating. And if you are a soldier or infiltrator, you will run out of ammo at times on some guns.

I don't think it was lazy for Bioware to give up on a unique ammo system, it was simply priorities. The current system didn't work for them and a lot of people so they did go with the standard. However, Bioware is an RPG maker; they don't have a long history of making shooter games. Companies who make shooters worry about their gameplay mechanics first and foremost. Bioware's games have more facets to worry about.

Personally, I don't play many shooters and I certainly don't care if Bioware is unique in any regard, as long as the gameplay is fun enough to keep me moving through the story. In ME1, gameplay got in the way. In ME2, the gameplay was finally fun but it was the story arc that lacked some energy for me.

So any suggestion that they go back to anything in ME1 makes me cringe. Yes, I do realize they can improve gameplay from ME2 (better mechanics, better level design), but I am far more concerned that they nail the story. I would rather they play it safe with the gameplay and go with what works, stealing innovations from real shooters, rather than spend a great deal of time and effort in being unique.

[termokanden]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

They limit rate of fire on powers with the cooldown, which many people also find aggravating. And if you are a soldier or infiltrator, you will run out of ammo at times on some guns.

Of course personal preference is a factor here. I would prefer if they finetuned the old system. I have no problems understanding if others didn't like it though.

I don't think it was lazy for Bioware to give up on a unique ammo system, it was simply priorities. The current system didn't work for them and a lot of people so they did go with the standard. However, Bioware is an RPG maker; they don't have a long history of making shooter games. Companies who make shooters worry about their gameplay mechanics first and foremost. Bioware's games have more facets to worry about.

No offense, but that sounds like a bit of a poor excuse to me. Gameplay mechanics are very important in CRPGs in general, I think.

So any suggestion that they go back to anything in ME1 makes me cringe. Yes, I do realize they can improve gameplay from ME2 (better mechanics, better level design), but I am far more concerned that they nail the story. I would rather they play it safe with the gameplay and go with what works, stealing innovations from real shooters, rather than spend a great deal of time and effort in being unique.

It's not just that it's unique. I liked how you could mod weapons and have tradeoffs like more power for increased heat generation. Ultimately it wasn't that well implemented and balanced, but this is something that could be fixed. Now you have a weapon, that's it.

Actually I probably miss the mod system more than unlimited ammo. Doesn't have to be like ME1 necessarily. I recently played Call of Pripyat, which has a very cool weapon mod system that I wouldn't mind Bioware stealing

It's not so much about actual balance there. You can finetune each weapon in CoP to fit your playstyle. Want to use your assault rifle for longer ranges? Mod for increased range and accuracy. Want to be Rambo? Mod for increased rate of fire, reduced recoil and better handling.

Modifié par termokanden, 24 septembre 2010 - 02:06 .

[Whatever42]

termokanden wrote...


Of course personal preference is a factor here. I would prefer if they finetuned the old system. I have no problems understanding if others didn't like it though.

No offense, but that sounds like a bit of a poor excuse to me. Gameplay mechanics are very important in CRPGs in general, I think.

It's not just that it's unique. I liked how you could mod weapons and have tradeoffs like more power for increased heat generation. Ultimately it wasn't that well implemented and balanced, but this is something that could be fixed. Now you have a weapon, that's it.

Actually I probably miss the mod system more than unlimited ammo. Doesn't have to be like ME1 necessarily. I recently played Call of Pripyat, which has a very cool weapon mod system that I wouldn't mind Bioware stealing

It's not so much about actual balance there. You can finetune each weapon in CoP to fit your playstyle. Want to use your assault rifle for longer ranges? Mod increased range and accuracy. Want to be Rambo? Mod for increased rate of fire, reduced recoil and better handling.

Gameplay mechanics are obviously important. They negatively impacted my enjoyment of ME1. But they are far more important in games where the gameplay is the only thing. Companies that make shooters don't have to write branching stories and record thousands of hours of dialogue. On top of it, they sell more games then even the most popular non-MMO RPG so they have lots of time and money to innovate their shooter mechanics. Bioware imo should steal shamelessly.

I do agree that this is all a matter of opinion. I can tell you why I prefer ME2, you can explain why you like ME1. Neither of us will change our minds because what aggravates me means nothing to you and vice versa. It's merely an exchange of viewpoints. As with many other changes in ME2, I was worried about the new ammo system and being forced to find clips and switch guns - I just found I enjoyed it more. Its entirely 100% subjective.

I will completely agree that I miss the mods. And the ammo powers I think are a bit of a cop out - I would prefer those to be still on the guns with just a better system of applying them.

But in reality, nothing seriously bugs me about the gameplay. I find it fun and nothing in it really detracts from that so I end up defending it not out of some philosophical position about gameplay but more out of simple fear that they'll break something while trying to be clever or that they'll suck too much time away from finishing the story properly.

Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 24 septembre 2010 - 02:16 .

[Kronner]

termokanden wrote...

If you want to force players to play more aggressively, make more aggressive enemies. Very simple. If they were more aggressive in general, you couldn't just sit behind a random crate and kill them one at a time.

I agree. But,
within the current system, limited ammo is better than unlimited.

[termokanden]

Oh but I do agree that the mechanics are better in ME2. I still would have preferred a finetuned version of the system from ME1 though.

Heatsinks are better then unlimited ammo. Why? Simple. With unlimited ammo you can play the whole game with one weapon only, with heatsinks you have to use all weapons, wich means variety for me.

What prevents you from switching weapons when you have unlimited ammo?

Modifié par termokanden, 24 septembre 2010 - 02:22 .

[jakal66]

I mean I know this this a sci fi game but thermal clips made the game more believable,I love switching to sidearm when out of ammo,it feels way more natural to me,in ME1 if you are an experienced video game player you find that controling your bursts of ammo is easy, I rarely found myself overheating any weapon even with mods that increased overheating.In my opinion clips are the way to go,plus without clips you wouldn't have had that awsome ending in zaeed's side quest!

Termokanden:

Nothing prevents you actually,but in a firefight you are more likely to keep using your main weapon,specially in ME2 where fights were more agressive(enemy rushing) unless you found yourself needing a cqc weapon like a shotgun for CLOSE ENCOUNTERS...so nothing prevents you but with clips it makes you use your ammo smarter and forces you to react with other weapons when needed.

Modifié par jakal66, 24 septembre 2010 - 02:46 .

[Shirosaki17]

I'm more optimistic about this concept than I originally was. As long as they could control the overheat bug, I think this could have worked. It sucked a lot searching for ammo at the beginning of the game because you could come close to running out. Once you had gotten certain ammo upgrades it didn't really become an issue, but the Vanguard which is built around the shotgun could easily run out of ammo, forcing them to sit behind cover instead of using charge.

Ammo also disappears if you turn your back on it or it goes out of sight. That really sucked. It also didn't seem to drop as much when incendiary was used on enemies.

You could add a feature similar to reload, that would take a second or 2 to cool the weapon and just have weapons cool down very, very slow on their own. Like take 30 seconds just to get an extra shot. So you would only get 3 to 5 shots or whatever it's limit was before having to use the cooling feature. Or you could shoot once or twice and use the cooling feature to cool the weapon down because you're stuck behind cover for a few seconds.

The story behind the cooling is it is obviously added to the gun to cool it if it overheats, but can't be used while firing because the gun would break or become damaged. You may need to even switch the weapon off or on safety or something before switching the weapon back on to use again, taking someone 1 to 2 seconds to effectively do to fully cool it to fire again.

Of course maybe it would be better to just stick to the ammo concept because they already did it for ME2 and to switch back might annoy people. However, I didn't like the fact that you could run out of ammo and had to pick it up off of enemies. I'd rather go into a battle with more than 20 shots on 2 or 3 weapons and not rely on picking up ammo off of others. It just doesn't seem to make sense to go into battle like that.

I mean they could have given infinite ammo to us and just had the reload feature as a cooling feature, while still having the same amount of shots on each weapon as we already have before having to cool the weapon and it wouldn't have changed much. It would have also fixed some of the plot inconsistencies in the game.

Modifié par Shirosaki17, 24 septembre 2010 - 03:20 .

[Evil_Weasel]

Kronner wrote...

No, the gameplay needs it. The ammo efficiency is important. Imagine Mattock or Viper with unlimited ammo. Crazy.
It would allow player to camp in safe spot and take out enemies without moving at all.

It doesnt occure to you that the game would have been diffrent if we had a heat system.........does it? Like more enimies would have had idk, more shields? more armor? more hitpoints?

But thats not hard to imagine, I use my Mattock every fight.....with my enginer.....and I simply have to spend about 10 seconds after every fight locating thermal clips instead of letting it cool down on the way to the next fight.

Im pretty sure 90% of people that didnt like the heat system either have reloading so engrained into them that anything eals is unnatural or they had a big problem with holding the button down till it went click, but instead of click they got the over heat warrning and thought who would make a gun that over heats thats just dumb now I cant use it this is stupid, instead of getting a feel for how long they could shoot, or shooting in burst.

I personaly like the heat system, but can accept that enough people wined about overheating that it went the way of the inventory system (delete). I think its silly that there are so many thermal clips littered around that most of the time I only have to change weapons for one fight to get full up again, and to me it seems alot like infinite ammo already only I have to run around for 10 seconds after every fight to have this infinite ammo.......just next time you play the game, use the avenger assualt rifle and the predator, and count how many times you have to go down to your pistol, and then how many times you have to use any other gun besides those two, there are tons of clips around, only thing is you have to hunt them.

[Shirosaki17]

Evil_Weasel wrote...
I personaly like the heat system, but can accept that enough people wined about overheating that it went the way of the inventory system (delete). I think its silly that there are so many thermal clips littered around that most of the time I only have to change weapons for one fight to get full up again, and to me it seems alot like infinite ammo already only I have to run around for 10 seconds after every fight to have this infinite ammo.......just next time you play the game, use the avenger assualt rifle and the predator, and count how many times you have to go down to your pistol, and then how many times you have to use any other gun besides those two, there are tons of clips around, only thing is you have to hunt them.

It may have something to do with the overheat bug from ME1. They may have not been able to find a fix for it or something. I don't even know if they ever fixed it in a patch or not. It wasn't fixed when I was playing it.

Yeah and it's scary how many things people complained about or suggested in the ME1 forums that went into ME2. Some of it was good, but some of it was bad.

[Kavadas]

Unlimited ammo was one of ME1's worst mechanics and I was glad to see it retconned out of the franchise.

[Shirosaki17]

kajtarp wrote...

Heatsinks are better then unlimited ammo. Why? Simple. With unlimited ammo you can play the whole game with one weapon only, with heatsinks you have to use all weapons, wich means variety for me.

You could but it would be a lot harder than switching weapons. The incentive is huge to switch between shield damaging weapons and armor damaging weapons. There would be a few who would want a challenge and maybe try to beat the game with just a Shurikan, but it would easily take longer and be more challenging than switching weapons.

[sinosleep]

I'm a fan of the new ammo system, and the only way I would like to see over heating come back (because even I think that lore wise it was a much better way to go) is if they prevent you from getting upgrades for it. The upgrades is what made overheating such a joke in ME 1. You slapped on frictionless materials and presto, you had a revenant with an infinite clip. If they locked down the over heating rate for every weapon to where it essentially matched up with the clip sizes of ME 2 then it'd be a fairly happy compromise. A mattock that has a 16 round clip and a mattock that WILL over heat at 16 rounds are more or less the same thing.

[tonnactus]

Siegdrifa wrote...


While it can appear to be a logical idea, like i said above in the game you meet situation where you need to consume more ressources to burst the ennemy.

Where? The game already gave you heavy weapons for that.The game designers could also made biotics and tech powers stronger again.
(or allow it even some squadmates to use heavy weapons for a restricted time/if i remember it right,there was a picture with grunt holding a heavy weapon,with a large cooldown of course)
Or in hybrid system,with a restricted amount of thermo clips,like medigel,like someone else already suggest at to use in such emergency situations. The way they do it in Mass Effect 2 was the most unoriginal and lazy way imaginable. With gimping biotic and tech powers,that took away something unique the first game had.

[tonnactus]

sinosleep wrote...

I'm a fan of the new ammo system, 

New? A thing that existed in dozen other shooters out there?

[Shirosaki17]

kajtarp wrote...

Shirosaki17 wrote...

kajtarp wrote...

Heatsinks are better then unlimited ammo. Why? Simple. With unlimited ammo you can play the whole game with one weapon only, with heatsinks you have to use all weapons, wich means variety for me.

You could but it would be a lot harder than switching weapons. The incentive is huge to switch between shield damaging weapons and armor damaging weapons. There would be a few who would want a challenge and maybe try to beat the game with just a Shurikan, but it would easily take longer and be more challenging than switching weapons.

Well, i was using Sniper only with explosive rounds in Mass Effect 1. Increased heat so slower rate of fire, but +400% firepower. It was capable of one shot alot of stuff. Never had to switch for any other weapon...

This really has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. ME2 is set up a lot differently than ME1.

[sinosleep]

tonnactus wrote...

New? A thing that existed in dozen other shooters out there?

Dude seriously? You chose that to focus on? It's been on a hell of a whole lot more than a dozen shooters, the point is it's new to Mass Effect.

[Pocketgb]

Terror_K wrote...
The thing is, some of us actually find this a detriment rather than a good mechanic because we feel it limits roleplaying, and often we don't want to have to use different weapons with one character and just want to stick with one.

Then you should find the Elder Scrolls series great because it offers you plenty options in character customization and personalization, but you don't because there's 'too much freedom'.

If that's the case, you should be able to respect Bioware attempted to put a balance on weapons via a limited ammo system so players don't use a sniper rifle as a shotgun, mid-range rifle, *and* long range sniping power machine. Yet you don't.

Terror_K wrote...
Forcing players to use weapons for builds they don't want to is bad design, IMO.

Then let's not have the game force you to use anything allowing massive role-playing freedom by being easy as pie.
Right?

tonnactus wrote...
New? A thing that existed in dozen other shooters out there?

New to Mass Effect, bub. If you want to go down that route then the previous ammo system - i.e. unlimited - is insanely archaic. If you're attempting to advocate for innovation then I don't think it'll work.