305 réponses à ce sujet

[Captain_Obvious_au]

So I'm playing ME1 and whilst driving around in the Mako, all of the old negatives float up as I'm bouncing down the side of a moutain after spending the last 10 minutes trying to get up it in vain.

But I then start thinking, whilst driving along a more-or-less flat section 'hang on, the Mako is actually a lot of fun to drive. Maybe it's not the Mako that was the problem, but the planet design?' I'm wondering what everyone else thinks - was the Mako undone by poor terrain design, or was it just a bad vehicle?

[GodWood]

I've always thought this.

Yes the mako wasn't perfect but it wasn't the issue, those stupid planet designs were.

[Daewan]

I loved the Mako. The terrain was often hard, but never impossible. There was always a way. But going in a straight line was more fun, and it usually worked. Eventually.

Traveling in the Mako gave the game a sense of scale that is utterly lacking in ME2. It was also easier to grasp than all the artificial restraints of the Hammerhead - the Mako is a tank, built like a tank, hits like a tank, and of course, flies like a tank. Unlike the Hammerhead, a hovertank which has no armor, doesn't hover very much, and does less damage than the handguns that Shepard carries.

Somewhere, there is an awesome Motivational of the Mako proclaiming, "I HAS A PHYSIX!" I feel that totally sums up the Mako travel process. That, and screaming "SCREW YOU, NEWTON!"

[Inquisitor Recon]

I gotta agree about the planet design, too many mountains and not enough ways to avoid them. As far as the actual vehicle goes, we all know about the strange physics it had, the coax MG was inaccurate and sounded like it had a much higher RoF than it actually did, and too often you couldn't depress the turret enough to engage targets close to the vehicle.



Also the way thresher maws would sometimes appear under the vehicle while your driving and kill you was annoying.

[sinosleep]

It's a combination of the two. Even without the terrain issues, the mako isn't the best handling vehicle in the universe. It manages to have both incredibly loose (if you hold forward while driving) and incredibly tight (if you don't hold forward while turning) that led to some rather ridiculous mid drive 180s.



Then you have to take into account that they should have taken the terrain the vehicle would be driving over into it's design in the first place. So any terrain issues could also be seen as vehicle issues simply because the vehicle should have been made to handle whatever terrain they were going to use in game. With the hammer head DLC you can clearly see the worlds were designed in concert with the vehicle. It is there largely to show off the hammer head's strengths. If the teams that designed the planets and the team that designed the vehicle that was meant to be used on them didn't work together then it was a monumental mistake.



Personally I think the biggest issue is having a wheeled vehicle with ME 1's physics and gravity effects. You would be driving along minding your own business, hit an indentation in the ground at an odd angle, and next thing you knew you were in the air doing a 180 or worse. A hovercraft wouldn't have had the physics issues the mako ran into, even on bad terrain.

[Grasser]

I always had fun with the Mako on the actual story missions,

it just got abit anoying and boring after a few of those side missions with planets with the high mountains.

also did'nt help that most of those side planets all nearly looked the same.

The Hammerhead is nice and more fun tho, but it needs a few upgrades, like sheilds, maybe decent armor and a icon that tells u how damaged it is, u know, what the Mako had.

I also wish the Hammerhead was used in ME2 instead of only been in DLC's.

[ErichHartmann]

The planets were too barren. Not enough content to keep me occupied or sidetracked. I'd love to see the Mako return for ME3. They just need to add more stuff.

[kalle90]

And even then I only remember the game having like 2-3 planets that had some annoying spots. I can accept that much as "natural development of planets". Otherwise it was much more fun than those Hammerhead missions which made me feel like I was playing some twisted version of Unreal Tournament/Halo



But I'd gladly take the option to choose Hammerhead for those 3 planets. With boost it would just fly over the mountains. For the rest I'd much prefer Mako though

[PARAGON87]

I really thought the Mako was good, never had really any compliants; then this glitch happened to me on Ilos.

Modifié par PARAGON87, 27 septembre 2010 - 04:08 .

[sinosleep]

kalle90 wrote...

And even then I only remember the game having like 2-3 planets that had some annoying spots. I can accept that much as "natural development of planets". Otherwise it was much more fun than those Hammerhead missions which made me feel like I was playing some twisted version of Unreal Tournament/Halo

But I'd gladly take the option to choose Hammerhead for those 3 planets. With boost it would just fly over the mountains. For the rest I'd much prefer Mako though

It's a heck of a whole lot more than 3 planets, it's practically EVERY side mission planet in the game. The story mission planets aren't bad because they don't force you to traverse mountainous terrain, the side mission planets are another story all together. I recently started a new ME 1 playthrough in order to get some data for the unlimitted ammo thread and as usual, I started doing all the side missions before doing the main quests in order to level up and get better weapons and armor and such. So after doing nothing but side missions in the mako for several hours I can say with confidence there was at best one planet where I didn't have to go mountain climbing to get to a mineral/artifact/base/etc

[GHOST OF FRUITY]

The Mako itself was fine. The planet worlds you drove it on definately weren't fine. They were a mixture of tedium and frustration.

[Nezzer]

Yeah, even Luna has mountains.

[Flamesz]

What BioWare should of down instead of scrapping it all was to improve vechicles and planet design and made the worlds larger to explore and it would of been great.

[Khayness]

Terrain design was horrible. Mako is a bit funky in tight places, Ilos Trench Run can be funky sometimes.

[kalle90]

sinosleep wrote...

kalle90 wrote...

And even then I only remember the game having like 2-3 planets that had some annoying spots. I can accept that much as "natural development of planets". Otherwise it was much more fun than those Hammerhead missions which made me feel like I was playing some twisted version of Unreal Tournament/Halo

But I'd gladly take the option to choose Hammerhead for those 3 planets. With boost it would just fly over the mountains. For the rest I'd much prefer Mako though

It's a heck of a whole lot more than 3 planets, it's practically EVERY side mission planet in the game. The story mission planets aren't bad because they don't force you to traverse mountainous terrain, the side mission planets are another story all together. I recently started a new ME 1 playthrough in order to get some data for the unlimitted ammo thread and as usual, I started doing all the side missions before doing the main quests in order to level up and get better weapons and armor and such. So after doing nothing but side missions in the mako for several hours I can say with confidence there was at best one planet where I didn't have to go mountain climbing to get to a mineral/artifact/base/etc

I also just did a new character who visited all landable planets. I guess I mean there were about 3 planets with really wide and steep areas Mako simply can't climb which means you have to drive for minutes to go around or just try to climb different parts and usually fail. All the other mountainous areas had quite accessible spots I could climb.

To be honest, before that last playthrough I also had an impression that majority of the planets were full of unclimbable mountains, but in the end it wasn't bad.

[Aprudena Gist]

The mako is still a better vehicle then this new pos despite all its failings. I dont understand why its so hard to make a vehicle that isn't crap.

[xIREDEEMEDIx]

yeah, I liked driving around in the Mako better.

[JRCHOharry]

I liked Mako. I driving on planet and find steep mountain and thinks 'how can climb?'. It passed time.

[Tazzmission]

i enjoyed the mako. heck i enjoyed the hammerhead also minus the small faults but they both can be improved in the long run

[Kavadas]

The Mako was awesome, it was the crappy maps which forced players over absurd terrain which made life difficult.

Anyways, it's the Fail-head that truly sucks.

Bring back the Mako.

[Pepper4]

both.

[vehzeel]

The driving gets old very fast, especially on planets with lots of mountains. I'd love to use the Hammerhead in ME1, though. The time spent planetside wouldn't be so tedious.

[Mister Mida]

I blame the planets' design. Sure the Mako was a bit oversensitive with bums on the 'road' but I think that could be easily changed. The plot-related planets were great fun with the Mako.

[Merlin 47]

Ahhh.....I was hoping for this type of question to be asked.  We now can talk about the REAL reason why the Mako sucked.

Percentage wise, I attribute it to this ratio: 75% planet exploration, 25% Mako.  Heck, I'd even consider going up to 85%/15% respectively.

I too, had the "crazy" glitch happen with me while driving on a standard planet.  Only once, but it happened.  A big problem with the Mako was the crappy, redundant planets.  There were times that I almost gave up on the mission, because of how sheer the cliff face was that I had to drive up.  But, after playing the Hammerhead, each vehicle has their pros and cons.

Pros for the Mako: Good armor, the cannon was a powerhouse.

Cons for the Mako: Slow as all frell, cannon had limited range (had to back up a lot of times when Geth infantry would get close).


Pros for the Hammerhead: Fast, had seeking missiles.

Cons for the Hammerhead: Armor that was crap, missiles didn't do as much damage as the Mako's cannon did.


It's a toss up; for the exploration you did in ME 1, I would just land on the planet, drive to the base, do the mission and get out.  After the first two or three planets, sure, it was fun to go explore!  But....around the fifth and sixth, they all started to look the same to me.  I just wanted to get to the base, get the job done and go home.  And this is where that small percentage comes in for why I didn't care for the Mako, because it was so slow (this is also why I liked planet scanning MUCH more, but that's for a different topic).

In ME 2, you already landed at the spot you had to infiltrate/investigate/shut down.  The Hammerhead I think was done much better in Overlord, and I see the actually Hammerhead/Firewalker missions as a "test run" for the Hammerhead.  Is it frustrating that the armor is crap?  Sure; why wouldn't it be?  For the times you need to use the Hammerhead, it's short, sweet and to the point.

If the Mako was redone the same way the Hammerhead was handled, sure, I'd like to see it come back alongside the Hammerhead.  Just dispose of the tedious planet exploration that I think really helped giving the Mako it's bad rep.