71 réponses à ce sujet

[rozpocet1]

 I think this would be the ultimate RPG feature:
(I use ME2 powers for all my examples)

Let's say every class has 5 active powers and only 1 of them is predefined. That's the class specific power and is not selectable for other classes. This means you can choose 4 additional powers. They only have to correspond to your class.

EXAMPLES:

SOLDIER - Combat Specialist
Adrenaline Rush (class Power)
+
4 Combat Powers

ADEPT - Biotic Specialist
Singularity (class Power)
+
4 Biotic Powers

ENGINEER - Tech Specialist
Combat Drone (class Power)
+
4 Tech Powers

VANGUARD - Biotic & Combat
Charge (class Power)
+
2 Biotic Powers
+
2 Combat Powers

SENTINEL - Biotic & Tech
Tech Armor (class Power)
+
2 Biotic Powers
+
2 Tech Powers

INFILTRATOR - Combat & Tech
Tactical Cloak (class Power)
+
2 Combat Powers
+
2 Tech Powers

The one specific power defines the class. Beyond that every player can choose and make their own character.
A Vanguard with Charge chooses Pull and Throw as his Biotic Powers and Fortification and Incendiary Ammo as his Combat Powers. 
There are so many possible combinations it never gets boring!!!

Some might say this would make things to easy for everyone. It partly could, but there are ways to make it difficult again:

1. Player classes have acces to fewer weapons.

• Infiltrators use only Sniper Rifles and maybe Pistols.
• Vanguards use only Shotguns and maybe Pistols.
• Adepts, Engineers and Sentinels use only SMGs and maybe Pistols .
• Soldiers use Assault Rifles and maybe 2 additional weapons.

2. Enemy protection layers should work differently in general. I don't want to shoot them down just like that in one order.

• Enemy shields recharge after some time behind cover. (Just like Shepard's shields)

This means an enemy with no shields left and only 50% health takes cover. Shields regenerate and he has 50% health and 100% shields again.

• Barrier could be used only for a limited amount of time but the enemy wouldn't take any damage.

Enemy has a barrier. You have to wait until it's gone and then you can take down his health until he uses the barrier again. (Of course with recharge time etc.)

Thank you for reading!
Your thoughts?

[FuturePasTimeCE]

agreed.

better yet, a customizable class?

Modifié par FuturePasTimeCE, 23 octobre 2010 - 11:41 .

[JaegerBane]

rozpocet1 wrote...

 I think this would be the ultimate RPG feature:
(I use ME2 powers for all my examples)

Let's say every class has 5 active powers and only 1 of them is predefined. That's the class specific power and is not selectable for other classes. This means you can choose 4 additional powers. They only have to correspond to your class.

It's already been suggested, comrade

(Look for the second off last post on page 2)

[rozpocet1]

Yup you're right! And I thought I was being original. Well what now? Useless post?

[JaegerBane]

rozpocet1 wrote...

Yup you're right! And I thought I was being original. Well what now? Useless post?

No, we need to keep repeating it, so the developers see it more often

[Bozorgmehr]

JaegerBane wrote...

rozpocet1 wrote...

Yup you're right! And I thought I was being original. Well what now? Useless post?

No, we need to keep repeating it, so the developers see it more often

Seconded. I like the idea about enemy defenses Rozpocet1, that would definitely improve the combat system. Your Barrier idea is great.

I would like to see some power customization too. It would be cool to be able to specialize powers, making them more powerful and/or last longer; work on or bypasses certain types of defenses altogether at the cost of much longer cooldowns or by making them less effective in other ways. I remember you could design your own spells in Oblivion, a similar system could be used in Mass Effect too.

Good ideas can never be repeated enough coz if games couldn't be improved there wouldn't be (good) ideas in the first place

[rozpocet1]

As with the defenses. What I was trying to say is that every protection should work differently. That was the main point, otherwise I think it doesn't make sense.



SHIELDS - not very strong, can take only little damage but are rechargeable

ARMOR - very strong, takes a lot of damage but is NOT rechargeable

BARRIER - takes no damage for a limited amount of time



And as long as we're not closing this post...

I also don't like the idea that exact same weapons deal different amount of damage when equipped by Shepard or enemies or the squad. That's not realistic!



TO JAEGERBANE:

I really didn't read your post (feel kind of stupid because it's practically the exact same thing) but as long as we have the same opinion about it... perfect.

[ashwind]

I think that the nature of the current protections are generated/provided from different sources, hence same weapon deals different amount of damage to different protection.

If I remember right, Soldier/Tech classes/enemies have Shields in their stat screen, Biotic classes/enemies have barriers. Armor - Krogan(Grunt). Hence, power such as Overload works on Shields but not Barrier and Reave against Barrier but not shields although they are basically the same except one is powered by technology the other biotic power.

As for customized skills, I think it will not make the game too much easier even if it were implemented as suggested due to the global cooldown and bonus power. Shepard will be better equip with powers to deal with different types of defense but not necessarily become stronger.

Modifié par ashwind, 23 octobre 2010 - 04:15 .

[rozpocet1]

Ad weapon damage: the vindicator does 36.8 damage when equipped by Shepard

But the damage multiplier for your squad is let's say 0.5 - they deal only half the damage



Ad protection: I understand that there is tech and biotic protection. That's exactly why I think they should work differently. And with different I don't mean that they can be taken down by different powers. They are based on different physical concepts. Barrier can't be the same thing as shields only in purple!

[ashwind]

rozpocet1 wrote...

Ad weapon damage: the vindicator does 36.8 damage when equipped by Shepard
But the damage multiplier for your squad is let's say 0.5 - they deal only half the damage

Ad protection: I understand that there is tech and biotic protection. That's exactly why I think they should work differently. And with different I don't mean that they can be taken down by different powers. They are based on different physical concepts. Barrier can't be the same thing as shields only in purple!

Ah... the squad damage modifier - sry misunderstood your post.

As for barriers and shields - yes, I agree that it can be mode more interesting but to make barriers invulnerable might be a little extreme. Maybe make shields a better protection against lighter impact weapons like SMG and barriers better against heavier impact weapons like shotguns or something along that line - instead of making one stronger than another, I favor making them effective against different attacks.

[The Spamming Troll]

JaegerBane wrote...

rozpocet1 wrote...

 I think this would be the ultimate RPG feature:
(I use ME2 powers for all my examples)

Let's say every class has 5 active powers and only 1 of them is predefined. That's the class specific power and is not selectable for other classes. This means you can choose 4 additional powers. They only have to correspond to your class.

It's already been suggested, comrade

(Look for the second off last post on page 2)

hell yeah! i started that.

it seems obviouse to me if ME3 is actually gonna get more into the RPG part of it, then customization is KEY. from abiliteis to weapons.

i mean if ME3 is going to be even more epic then the first two games, the only way is to expand class customization. as much as i actually enjoy ME2, i just hope ME3 brings even more to the table when it comes to what each class can offer, other then one ability you spam over and over and over and over and over, and then use reave...

[atheelogos]

FuturePasTimeCE wrote...

agreed.

better yet, a customizable class?

this. I would much rather build my own class.

[AntiChri5]

I dont like your idea.

If you could have an Infiltrator with Overload and Incinerate what reason would there ever be to play as an Engineer?

[Kronner]

Drone?
You can have Infiltrator with Incinerate and Energy Drain, which is much better than Overload. Yet people still play Engineer class.

Modifié par Kronner, 24 octobre 2010 - 10:10 .

[Bozorgmehr]

That level of customization is the killing blow to squadies. They'll become more or less redundant if you can design your own class. I like how team-tactics work in ME2; so many different squadies, all with strengths and weaknesses (like Shep). ME2 even forces the player to use every squadmate at least once (Loyalty missions).



I don't mind more choices, the option to specialize etc. But Bioware should keep the different classes; it's the main reason why I still play this game. And even after months I still discover new things (never thought I would like the Engineer much, but a couple of cool videos changed my mind and I'm currently having a great time with my SG Engineer).



The greatest threat to any rpg is the "super build" thus limiting things to a couple of OPed moves and reducing most powers / abilities to some nice toys at best. I'm currently playing FO3 Vegas and although its an excellent rpg when it comes to exploring and decision making; the character creation is pretty bad. FO3's only replay value is by making different choices who to help and who to kill. There's no real difference in overall gameplay (sure you can complete some tasks with a high enough speech skill, but you have to fight a lot too - this forces player to invest in combat skills too and most people will end up having roughly similar builds)



Whether you like the ME2 class system or not; you can't deny that starting a new game with a different class will be a totally new experience.

[JaegerBane]

Bozorgmehr wrote...
Whether you like the ME2 class system or not; you can't deny that starting a new game with a different class will be a totally new experience.

That's true, but I'm not sure this is adequate justification for crippling the player's ability to customise their class. At the end of the day the player really needs a certain amount of leeway to build up their character to match their vision of what the class is, and you don't necessarily need to remove this to ensure different classes play differently.

[davidshooter]

Slightly off topic but related to these kinds of discussions:

It was stated often before release that this game was going to try to streamline some of the RPG elements and create an easy story entry point in order to have a greater appeal to more traditional shooter players. To what extent was this successful? Did this game crossover as hoped? Hardcore RPG fans of this game were somewhat disappointed - did Bioware gain enough in new sales to offset this?

Modifié par davidshooter, 24 octobre 2010 - 02:19 .

[Kronner]

ME1 was not hardcore RPG either.



I think most people agree that the gameplay is much better in ME2.

[Bozorgmehr]

JaegerBane wrote...

Bozorgmehr wrote...
Whether you like the ME2 class system or not; you can't deny that starting a new game with a different class will be a totally new experience.

That's true, but I'm not sure this is adequate justification for crippling the player's ability to customise their class. At the end of the day the player really needs a certain amount of leeway to build up their character to match their vision of what the class is, and you don't necessarily need to remove this to ensure different classes play differently.

True, but too much customization can be risky:

Giving Engineers the option to chose tech skills will be the end of Overload for example: Energy Drain is superior in every way (except Pyro detonations, but they are rare and you can bring squadies to deal with them or use Incinerate). I respec Sentinel and Engineer (who can use Overload by defeault) and take ED instead (on Geth missions). I believe that's kinda weird. Even an ED Adept will be more effective against Geth than an Engineer without ED (a biotic specialist > tech specialist just by switching bonus power, WTF).

I would favor a system where most powers remain predetermined like they are now, but with different ways to evolve them. Sticking with the Overload example this could be done by adding extra goodies while leveling up:

- do you want Overload to be more powerful;
- or do you prefer to sacrifice some of its power, but receive a shield boost (like ED does)
- or is a huge AeO your thing
- maybe weapon overheating (bypassing defenses) provides the extra CC you need
- instacast or the need to travel to target first changes how best to use powers
- or do you already like it as it is and just want to be able to use it more often (reducing cooldown)

I'm just thinking aloud here, but such a system ensures classes will play differently, but there's plenty of room to develop your character the way you want.

[Bozorgmehr]

davidshooter wrote...

Slightly off topic but related to these kinds of discussions:

It was stated often before release that this game was going to try to streamline some of the RPG elements and create an easy story entry point in order to have a greater appeal to more traditional shooter players. To what extent was this successful? Did this game crossover as hoped? Hardcore RPG fans of this game were somewhat disappointed - did Bioware gain enough in new sales to offset this?

The dilemma is; do you want a rpg game (lots of powers and ablities, but gameplay will be closer to a rts game than an actual shooter) or do you want the immersion, fast paced action and intensity only shooters can provide (less powers and abilites, but much smoother gameplay)?

ME1 leaned towards the rpg element, while ME2 is closer to a shooter. I like most of what Bioware did to streamline the combat system. I hope they keep the great action of ME2 in its successor, but meanwhile offer a little more customization. A difficult task, but if anyone is up to it, I think it's Bioware.

[davidshooter]

Kronner wrote...

ME1 was not hardcore RPG either.

I think most people agree that the gameplay is much better in ME2.

I agree with both statements.  What I was getting at was that Bioware seemed to put a lot of thought into converting people who hadn't played ME1 and who don't normally play RPG/hybrids.  Apart from gameplay (which was definitely improved) there were a lot of changes to things like story layout, the mission screens instead of walking back to your ship, a reduction in customization etc etc. 
My sense is that the game didn't really cross over very well, that sales of ME2 were about the same as ME but I'm not sure if that's supported by sales figures or not?  I'm wondering how this success/failure will impact their future decisions.

[JaegerBane]

Kronner wrote...

ME1 was not hardcore RPG either.

I think most people agree that the gameplay is much better in ME2.

I agree. The gameplay is significantly better.

However, I certainly don't think all of the changes introduced were for the better. For example:

The reduction in the number of skills each character uses was allegedly done to 'streamline' gameplay but, frankly, I'm not really sure whether it realistically did. I don't ever remember getting confused or bogged-down in ME1 trying to decide what power one of my team mates should use - it's not like I had a dozen choices to wade through.

The concept of ammo powers themselves, I think, was a very elegant design choice which eliminated the need to fiddle with the inventory, but the implementation was very sloppy and clunky. The reasoning for certain ammo powers available only to certain classes was never explained, you were often forced to start sections of gameplay frantically fiddling with ammo powers - given the whole reason these were done was to remove the need for fiddling with the inventory, it just seemed like they'd defeated the object, as it still left the player screwing around with their equipment. The only thing they removed was the ability to decide before a mission what ammo you were carrying in a gun - I'm not really sure whether this was a good idea. And then we have the truly woeful idea of 'squad ammo powers', which made absolutely no sense and were so poorly implemented they didn't even work properly in the initial release of the game.

Armour for other characters being removed never made any sense whatsoever. I'm not convinced much thought went into that.

I could go on and on. I guess my concern about ME3 is that Bioware start making changes for the sake of making changes, as they appeared to do with ME2. They've definitely nailed the gameplay, and the level design. Some of the sections of ME2 were among some of the most well-crafted examples of gaming I've ever played... I just hope they keep stuff that works, irrespective of how old it is.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 24 octobre 2010 - 03:21 .

[JaegerBane]

Bozorgmehr wrote...
True, but too much customization can be risky:

Giving Engineers the option to chose tech skills will be the end of Overload for example: Energy Drain is superior in every way (except Pyro detonations, but they are rare and you can bring squadies to deal with them or use Incinerate). I respec Sentinel and Engineer (who can use Overload by defeault) and take ED instead (on Geth missions). I believe that's kinda weird. Even an ED Adept will be more effective against Geth than an Engineer without ED (a biotic specialist > tech specialist just by switching bonus power, WTF).

I would favor a system where most powers remain predetermined like they are now, but with different ways to evolve them. Sticking with the Overload example this could be done by adding extra goodies while leveling up:

- do you want Overload to be more powerful;
- or do you prefer to sacrifice some of its power, but receive a shield boost (like ED does)
- or is a huge AeO your thing
- maybe weapon overheating (bypassing defenses) provides the extra CC you need
- instacast or the need to travel to target first changes how best to use powers
- or do you already like it as it is and just want to be able to use it more often (reducing cooldown)

I'm just thinking aloud here, but such a system ensures classes will play differently, but there's plenty of room to develop your character the way you want.

In the above case, the question becomes an issue of whether the powers have been properly balanced. Obviously I don't think the current spread of powers are balanced well enough to permit a no-holds-barred approach to selecting skills, but that's a problem with their balance, not of class structure. Restricting the choice to completely exclude player preference isn't really a progressive method of dealing with the balance issue, it's simplistic. Rather than fixing the problem, it's simply moving it to one side.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 24 octobre 2010 - 03:26 .

[Kronner]

JaegerBane wrote...

Kronner wrote...

ME1 was not hardcore RPG either.

I think most people agree that the gameplay is much better in ME2.

I agree. The gameplay is significantly better.

However, I certainly don't think all of the changes introduced were for the better. For example:

The reduction in the number of skills each character uses was allegedly done to 'streamline' gameplay but, frankly, I'm not really sure whether it realistically did. I don't ever remember getting confused or bogged-down in ME1 trying to decide what power one of my team mates should use - it's not like I had a dozen choices to wade through.

The concept of ammo powers themselves, I think, was a very elegant design choice which eliminated the need to fiddle with the inventory, but the implementation was very sloppy and clunky. The reasoning for certain ammo powers available only to certain classes was never explained, you were often forced to start sections of gameplay frantically fiddling with ammo powers - given the whole reason these were done was to remove the need for fiddling with the inventory, it just seemed like they'd defeated the object, as it still left the player screwing around with their equipment. The only thing they removed was the ability to decide before a mission what ammo you were carrying in a gun - I'm not really sure whether this was a good idea. And then we have the truly woeful idea of 'squad ammo powers', which made absolutely no sense and were so poorly implemented they didn't even work properly in the initial release of the game.

Armour for other characters being removed never made any sense whatsoever. I'm not convinced much thought went into that.

I could go on and on. I guess my concern about ME3 is that Bioware start making changes for the sake of making changes, as they appeared to do with ME2. They've definitely nailed the gameplay, and the level design. Some of the sections of ME2 were among some of the most well-crafted examples of gaming I've ever played... I just hope they keep stuff that works, irrespective of how old it is.

Agreed. BW removed too much, hope they offer more of everything in ME3.

[sinosleep]

I think the reason BioWare made the decision they did when it comes to armor is the same reason they went with small facemasks instead of full on helmets, it makes it so that the characters are individuals instead of different face models plastered on the body models over and over and over again.



Just look at DA:O where Morrigan had a distinct body type while wearing her own robes yet wound up with the same body type as every other model in the game when wearing anything else. In ME 2 they basically made every character Morrigan.



I mean it's either they limit the player in what they can put on the characters so that they retain their individuality or they make a separate armor model for every character in the game. Honestly you'd think that in 2010 making different models for the armors wouldn't be all that much of a pain in the ass but if I've gotta give up squadmate armor for a more individualized look then so be it.