1700 réponses à ce sujet

[Pocketgb]

Frybread76 wrote...
I think this issue is why should any class have access to an ammo power but a another class not have access.  If an ammo power involves a soldier, for instance, pushing a button on a gun to create an effect, then why can't an adept push that same button and create the same effect?  Do classes have different guns, or are some classes not trained to push a button to create fire ammo or disruptor ammo?

If you're gonna go there then we'll have to look at why only Vanguards can charge, why only Sentinals get the 'supah!' armor, why Adepts can't charge, etc. You'll have to go even further with the minor skills, as I already mentioned.

If you're asking how it makes sense lore-wise then your guess is just as good as mine, and that goes for everything I've already listed, both from the prequel and sequel in the Mass Effect series.

Terror_K wrote...

The whole scarring thing is a stupid concept from the start. This isn't freakin Fable...

I'd actually pin the blame on KotOR, honestly. Fable was 2004, KotOR was 2003.

[Frybread76]

Pocketgb wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...
I think this issue is why should any class have access to an ammo power but a another class not have access.  If an ammo power involves a soldier, for instance, pushing a button on a gun to create an effect, then why can't an adept push that same button and create the same effect?  Do classes have different guns, or are some classes not trained to push a button to create fire ammo or disruptor ammo?

If you're gonna go there then we'll have to look at why only Vanguards can charge, why only Sentinals get the 'supah!' armor, why Adepts can't charge, etc. You'll have to go even further with the minor skills, as I already mentioned.

If you're asking how it makes sense lore-wise then your guess is just as good as mine, and that goes for everything I've already listed, both from the prequel and sequel in the Mass Effect series.

Terror_K wrote...

The whole scarring thing is a stupid concept from the start. This isn't freakin Fable...

I'd actually pin the blame on KotOR, honestly. Fable was 2004, KotOR was 2003.

Actually, Vangaurds can Charge because they have L5n implants, which no other class has.  Adepts have L5x implants that allow them to do Singularity.

As far as I know, Tech armor was never explained, unlike the retconning job with the ammo super powers and weapon mods.

[Pocketgb]

Frybread76 wrote...
Actually, Vangaurds can Charge because they have L5n implants, which no other class has.  Adepts have L5x implants that allow them to do Singularity.

As far as I know, Tech armor was never explained, unlike the retconning job with the ammo super powers and weapon mods.

Very little is explained, honestly, and in a more realistic fashion things don't make much 'sense'. But since it's a game we have to ask whether or not it makes sense mechanically, and for better or worse things are relatively sound.

[Terror_K]

Pocketgb wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

The whole scarring thing is a stupid concept from the start. This isn't freakin Fable...

I'd actually pin the blame on KotOR, honestly. Fable was 2004, KotOR was 2003.

It didn't bother me in KotOR because being twisted by the dark side of the force was something already established in the Star Wars canon. In Mass Effect the concept makes little to no sense, and the explanation behind it is completely trite. It's just another one of many examples where in ME2 BioWare seemed to just not care about the overall realism and integrity of the ME world any more and just did all these things "becoz they b kewl!!1"

BioWare really need to pull the series back down to Earth with ME3, because as it stands with ME2 I simply can't take the universe seriously any more, and that's breaks immersion more than anything else.

[Pocketgb]

You know that I know better than that, Terror. I understand full well that the concept doesn't necesarily 'fit' in the ME setting. I'm saying I'd rather blame KotOR for morality 'distinction' as opposed to Fable.

[ybfelix]

http://tvtropes.org/...tsForNeutrality
 
Although honestly if I was writing the game within the P/R framework it's hard to come up with a solution to reward neutral characters in gameplay.

I think there should be instances where both blue/red dialog choices will "fail" and not automatically get the "best" result, and you need to trek through white choices. But that would confuse players (not me, but I guess a lot others. It seems "playtesters" or "test screening audience" often differ from my taste <_< ).

Modifié par ybfelix, 08 octobre 2010 - 11:15 .

[Iakus]

Pocketgb wrote...

You know that I know better than that, Terror. I understand full well that the concept doesn't necesarily 'fit' in the ME setting. I'm saying I'd rather blame KotOR for morality 'distinction' as opposed to Fable.

But Fable is the game that's "known" for the Hero gaining physical changes based on stats and alignment.  KOTOR may have done it first, but Fable made it famous.

Besides, while KOTOR is also a Bioware game, Terror_K is right that the Star Wars Universe made such a changes canon.  I guess in the end you could blame George Lucas for it.  He predates both games

Either way, I'm really glad I play my Shep paragon so I don't have to deal with that.

[Pocketgb]

iakus wrote...
But Fable is the game that's "known" for the Hero gaining physical changes based on stats and alignment.  KOTOR may have done it first, but Fable made it famous.

The bolded is the point of what I'm saying, Iakus, and I consider Fable to be one of many to copy-paste its path.

And I know full well that Terror is right. You should've understood that with the post you just quoted, homes.

[Iakus]

Pocketgb wrote...

iakus wrote...
But Fable is the game that's "known" for the Hero gaining physical changes based on stats and alignment.  KOTOR may have done it first, but Fable made it famous.

The bolded is the point of what I'm saying, Iakus, and I consider Fable to be one of many to copy-paste its path.

And I know full well that Terror is right. You should've understood that with the post you just quoted, homes.

I got that.  I'm just saying that Fable made it famous (two can play at that game) .  Bogart wasn't the first actor to play Sam Spade, but that's who you generally think of when someone mentions "The Maltese Falcon"

[Pocketgb]

iakus wrote...
I got that.  I'm just saying that Fable made it famous.

Can't agree there, but neither of us are going to be able to bring anything to the table regarding this. Dropped.

[Darth Drago]

Lumikki wrote...

Frybread76 wrote...

I think this issue is why should any class have access to an ammo power but a another class not have access. If an ammo power involves a soldier, for instance, pushing a button on a gun to create an effect, then why can't an adept push that same button and create the same effect? Do classes have different guns, or are some classes not trained to push a button to create fire ammo or disruptor ammo?

I agree, all classes in ME series are military classes and all of them use ammos in they weapons. So, there isn't reason to deny some class not to have special ammos. Because ammos are just addional stuff to weapons. It's different to limit weapons as training, than something what that weapon can use.

-The problem is that in BioWare’s infinite wisdom to screw up ME2 they changed simple weapon mods for changing ammo types into powers like its on level with biotic powers or special training a tech would have for their powers/abilities. It is not however, its simply switching a chip or pushing a button on the gun. Just watch the action you do when you use one of these “ammo powers”, it looks like flipping a switch to me.

This excuse of using them for balancing game mechanics is just insulting to hear. Just as it is for them to drop out crouching because someone during the few times anyone play tested the game found an exploit and no one couldn’t be bothered to fix the problem.

Did we need balancing of game mechanics if the enemies we fought didn’t have shields, armor and/or tech armor on top of their health bar? But oh wait, the entire galaxy got severe tech upgrades in under two years from new armor types, thermal clips (that don’t do what they are supposed to do), weapons that use them and of course a hover craft/tank that is utter crap if it were to go head to head with what we fought in ME1.

[ybfelix]

I don't particularly mind lack of crouching. But I find that you have to first against you back to a cover then be able to vault over it quite absurd. It looks very unnatural in Gears of War, and unnatural here too. I think Splinter Cell Conviction did crouch/cover/vault right. Map jumping over and enter cover on seperate keys would be better.

Modifié par ybfelix, 09 octobre 2010 - 03:04 .

[Darth Drago]

ybfelix wrote...

I don't particularly mind lack of crouching. But I find that you have to first against you back to a cover then be able to vault over it quite absurd. It looks very unnatural in Gears of War, and unnatural here too. I think Splinter Cell Conviction did crouch/cover/vault right. Map jumping over and enter cover on seperate keys would be better.

-No argument on the lame duck and under cover before jumping over a low wall. There have been many deaths caused by this bad button/action combination. Again all in the name of better game mechanics to make a average at best shooter game.

Crouching for me at least, was a key strategy in ME1 when using a sniper rifle and to some extent the assault rifle. I used the terrain (hills, rocks and such) and line of sight to get most of my kills. Being glued to a surface using this half thought out cover system restricts a lot of stealth like movement and freedom. Take a shot or two and move out of sight to another spot to slowly pop out into view to do take a few more shots.

The way ME2 is I really have even question why we even have a sniper rifle at all since its never used the way its supposed to be used, to get stealthy kills from a distance. In ME2 its only used for shooting pests in spots that you cant get to or just for the fun of getting a few quick kills. Name one level where you even have an element of surprise or even that is large enough to use a sniper rifle (by your side or an enemy) effectively without having to deal with enemies at close range as well.

[Turin_4]

I agree, all classes in ME series are military classes and all of them use ammos in they weapons. So, there isn't reason to deny some class not to have special ammos. Because ammos are just addional stuff to weapons. It's different to limit weapons as training, than something what that weapon can use.

This doesn't make much sense to me. Modifying one's weapon to fire different types of ammunition is not something that it is completely implausible to imagine actually takes some degree of training to know how to do, particularly in the heat of combat in a matter of seconds.

[Lumikki]

Turin_4 wrote...

I agree, all classes in ME series are military classes and all of them use ammos in they weapons. So, there isn't reason to deny some class not to have special ammos. Because ammos are just addional stuff to weapons. It's different to limit weapons as training, than something what that weapon can use.

This doesn't make much sense to me. Modifying one's weapon to fire different types of ammunition is not something that it is completely implausible to imagine actually takes some degree of training to know how to do, particularly in the heat of combat in a matter of seconds.

You mean that if  "on clips" is says armor piercing ammos, character isn't skilled enough to put clip in his weapon?
How ever, if "on clips" it says normal ammos, character now knows how to put clip in his weapons?

Modifié par Lumikki, 09 octobre 2010 - 03:57 .

[Terror_K]

Especially when you could with any class in ME1, and when it was established that weapon mods are pretty much plug-and-play.

[Frybread76]

Turin_4 wrote...

I agree, all classes in ME series are military classes and all of them use ammos in they weapons. So, there isn't reason to deny some class not to have special ammos. Because ammos are just addional stuff to weapons. It's different to limit weapons as training, than something what that weapon can use.

This doesn't make much sense to me. Modifying one's weapon to fire different types of ammunition is not something that it is completely implausible to imagine actually takes some degree of training to know how to do, particularly in the heat of combat in a matter of seconds.

It takes Shepard less than a few seconds to activate an ammo power, which appears to be him just pushing a button.  What special training is needed for that?

[Pocketgb]

 Maybe only Soldiers are trained to figure out something as crazy as this.

[ybfelix]

Darth Drago wrote...

ybfelix wrote...

I don't particularly mind lack of crouching. But I find that you have to first against you back to a cover then be able to vault over it quite absurd. It looks very unnatural in Gears of War, and unnatural here too. I think Splinter Cell Conviction did crouch/cover/vault right. Map jumping over and enter cover on seperate keys would be better.

-No argument on the lame duck and under cover before jumping over a low wall. There have been many deaths caused by this bad button/action combination. Again all in the name of better game mechanics to make a average at best shooter game.

 
Or, say, enter cover and then push stick foward and press A to jump over it takes 1.5 seconds as of now? Then make it so that if you are standing right next to a cover and push stick toward it continuously for 1.5 seconds, you jumps over it without having to enter cover (of course you can still enter and jump if you wish.)
 
Personally I feel weapons in ME does too much damage, both to enemies and the player, making both tougher might result in better gunplay on normal difficulty. Didn't think this throughly though.

Modifié par ybfelix, 09 octobre 2010 - 06:12 .

[Darth Drago]

ybfelix wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

ybfelix wrote...

I don't particularly mind lack of crouching. But I find that you have to first against you back to a cover then be able to vault over it quite absurd. It looks very unnatural in Gears of War, and unnatural here too. I think Splinter Cell Conviction did crouch/cover/vault right. Map jumping over and enter cover on seperate keys would be better.

-No argument on the lame duck and under cover before jumping over a low wall. There have been many deaths caused by this bad button/action combination. Again all in the name of better game mechanics to make a average at best shooter game.

Or, say, enter cover and then push stick foward and press A to jump over it takes 1.5 seconds as of now? Then make it so that if you are standing right next to a cover and push stick toward it continuously for 1.5 seconds, you jumps over it without having to enter cover (of course you can still enter and jump if you wish.)

-Wasn’t this sort of the way it was in Mass Effect 1? If I recall you could effectively run at a low barrier and effortlessly jump over it. Funny how what we got now is considered “progress”.

ybfelix wrote...
Personally I think weapons in ME does too much damage, both to enemies and the player, making both tougher would result in better gunplay on normal difficulty. Didn't think this throughly though.

-The nice thing about ME1 was that you did encounter enemies that could kill you in a single shot (or 2) or hit regardless of difficulty. Look at the rockets, thresher maw, snipers, Geth Armatures, Geth Colossus just to name a few things that could ruin your day if you moved in the wrong direction when they shot.

Now in ME2 is there anything at all that can kill you in a single shot at all difficulties? Even the thresher maw is insulting with its waving tentacles all but saying “I’ll pop up here in a second, get ready to shoot me!” and total lack of movement. Its all about cheap shots to stun you and turn your screen to crap with the lame bloody veins to hinder your vision.

[Darth Drago]

Pocketgb wrote...

 Maybe only Soldiers are trained to figure out something as crazy as this.

-LOL! I don’t know exactly what I just saw but I doubt even Mordin would be able to figure that out and be able to shoot it.

I just cant wait to see if BioWare decides to screw up the already messed up ammo “powers” and thermal clips with something even worse.

[Turin_4]

You mean that if  "on clips" is says armor piercing ammos, character isn't skilled enough to put clip in his weapon?
How ever, if "on clips" it says normal ammos, character now knows how to put clip in his weapons?

This is a discussion that's been had before, but: do you actually think that just because all that is shown is a couple of buttons being pushed that that's all that's going on, anymore than when an AI is being hacked, all that is being done is an omni tool menu is being pulled down?  It is easy and plausible to imagine there is more to it than just pushing a button.

As for clips, that's not how ammunition in the ME universe works.

Especially when you could with any class in ME1, and when it was established that weapon mods are pretty much plug-and-play.

Yes, I know.  Sometimes there are hiccups between games for gameplay balance issues.  I'm perfectly aware it's not perfect continuity.  I know it's a pothole in the road.  Here's my response to that: Big Deal.  It was decided that your non-weapon specialists can no longer instantly and effortlessly trick their weapons and ammunition out in any way they see fit at any time in any situation at no character-building cost.  You're right, that's just completely out there and absurd.

It takes Shepard less than a few seconds to activate an ammo
power, which appears to be him just pushing a button.  What special
training is needed for that?

See above.  Just because something appears to be pushing a button does not necessarily mean it is only pushing a button.  That's a pretty standard sci-fi and fantasy convention for ease of storytelling.  Complicated magic and technological accomplishments are done very simply.

I just cant wait to see if BioWare decides to screw up the already
messed up ammo “powers” and thermal clips with something even worse.

If by 'screw up' you mean 'change to something that meets with even more nigh-universal acclaim', then I'll just say, "Me, too!" 

[smudboy]

Lumikki wrote...
You are not forced to play paragon or renegade. You can make any choise in dialog you want, what can lead any kind result between extereme paragon and renegade result.

Except when you don't have enough P/R points and the choices are grayed out.

What you want as player is 100% positive results from dialogs, so that your choises in past dialogs has no affect to currect choises. Because that's only difference between going extreme ways or been more neutral. You can't handle as player negative outcomes, as not having that 100% postive result in dialogs. That's you real problem.

We want choices, not problem solving.

[Zulu_DFA]

smudboy wrote...
We want choices, not problem solving.

But we also want the choices to bite us in the аss from time to time!

[smudboy]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

smudboy wrote...
We want choices, not problem solving.

But we also want the choices to bite us in the аss from time to time!

I'd be happy with choices that impact anything at this point, including my ass.