188 réponses à ce sujet

[Jaron Oberyn]

mrsph wrote...

The choices and dialog still felt the same to me as they did in Mass Effect, they couldn't implement all of the consequences because it would be too much trouble for the second part in the trilogy. The story is really a matter of opinion since I enjoyed the character based loyalty missions then I did the generic space opera of Mass Effect.

The combat in the original Mass Effect was boring. And on top of being boring it was frustrating. Cover was useless and too much of a hassle to get behind because Shepard wouldn't stick to it, there was no strategy involved with the weapons. Just wait until the spectre weapons unlock and then stick two frictionless mods so you can just tape down the fire button and just win every battle.

I love RPGs more than any shooter anyday. But Mass Effect failed at being either of them while Mass Effect 2 managed to be a fun combination of the two.

I agree that ME1's combat was bad, but ME1 had that traditional RPG feel. It felt open world. You didn't have to do anything in any particular order, you could go to any planet you want. I particularly loved the large scale landable planets. it felt realistic. I could set up in the mountains and pick off enemies at a merc base with my sniper. Things like that. It felt like there was no end. In ME2, it's completely the opposite. I feel restricted to a certain area. It doesn't have that open world feeling. Hopefully they correct that for ME3.

-Polite

[AdmiralCheez]

@Archeron: They owe it to us to at least finish the core trilogy, and I'll probably lose interest in it after that. As for the 80%-play-as-soldiers thing, then can you see why the game is more of a shooter now? Not saying it's a step in the right direction, but it shows that they really WERE paying attention to the players.

@Polite: One million options isn't that exciting if you have enough stat points to nearly max out everything. Sure, I love diversity, but only if it means you have to pass up one thing to get another. Hence why I liked ME2's power system better. Just give us a little more choice and we're good!

To be honest, the Mass Effect series was a godsend for me. I hate most pure shooters (they give me a headache) and I hate most pure RPGs (they're hellishly boring). ME took the things I liked from both of them and balanced them out so neither one could ruin the experience for me.

You can have your opinion all you want, and I know I can't change your mind, but I have the right to share mine as well. You argue your points well, and I like that.

Out of curiosity, why do you sign your posts? To be formal, or just for the sake of style?

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 19 novembre 2010 - 01:54 .

[Sursion]

So for those in favour of hardcore RPG in ME3. Did you seriously find it enjoyable to spend an hour on the citadel doing everyones shopping list? ME2 was a step in the right direction.

[AdmiralCheez]

Sursion, I should kiss you.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Sursion wrote...

So for those in favour of hardcore RPG in ME3. Did you seriously find it enjoyable to spend an hour on the citadel doing everyones shopping list? ME2 was a step in the right direction.

ME2 was the perfect balance, I agree.  The worry is that some of the action sections will pick up shootin' fer shootin's sake instead of the perfect balance of shootin' and jawin' that ME2 had.

[gadna13]

gadna13 wrote...

Secondly,
why would Bioware create a new ME shooter game (which it looks like it
will be) only to make ME3 another shooter. Bioware is creating this game
to cater to the COD fans to busy for ME3 to increase sales while
leaving ME3 much of the same of ME2. If ME3 is 'guaranteed' to be just a
shooter, why create this shooting game?

Sursion wrote...

Actually, quite the opposite. By releasing a game for the shooter market, ME3 is free to travel along the RPG route without having to cater to shooter fans.

That is actually exactly what I was trying to say. I should have reread it before posting because it doesn't sound that way at all.

Anyway, I think that ME2 was an excellent game and really only minor changes need to be made to make ME3 even better. Making a strict shooter game (if this upcoming title is such a case) in Bioware's eyes will cater to the shooter-genre market while still allowing ME3 to follow along the same path as ME2.

[casedawgz]

If this is truly a multiplayer shooter, I appluad Bioware's efforts. However, there are a number of companies who have been making multiplayer shooters better and for longer, and if Bioware wants to get into that market they have their work cut out for them. It's almost to bad EA didn't hand the project off to Dice, they know what they're doing when it comes to the genre.

[kraidy1117]

Sursion wrote...

So for those in favour of hardcore RPG in ME3. Did you seriously find it enjoyable to spend an hour on the citadel doing everyones shopping list? ME2 was a step in the right direction.

LOLWUT!?

[Spectre 7]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

 Back in ME1 I'd just pick the gun with the most yellow bars, slap on the highest level upgrades to match what I was shooting at, and spend my EXP to get to the next circle or triangle. In ME2, I have to think carefully about where I spend my squad points, since they're such a limited resource, and I have to test out each gun in different situations to see which works best. Sure, there are only, like, three per category, but it sure beats "oh look the stats are higher I should equip this one and spent the next five minutes either omnigelling or selling the rest of this crap!"

And I don't know about you, but most shooters don't focus on character development and team management. Sure, the main story sucked, but less menu screens and numbers does not a dumber game make.

QFT

Mass Effect made in painfully obvious where points should be spent, and if you went the route of two playthroughs, you didn't have to spend much on speech points which left you with an abundance to spend on everything else.

My infiltrator builds all turned out the same. The only real debate I ever had with an adept was if stasis was worth the class specialization. And the decision that I spent the longest time making was whether or not a shotgun for my vanguard was even worth it due to the amazing quality of the spectre pistol. I ultimately decided that using one weapon would be boring, which is hilarious because I never had to switch from the shotgun because of its uber-range.

Flame Mass Effect all you want, at least I have to spend time thinking about the build before I run through the game. There are no overpowered weapons, so advanced training actually matters. Choosing between power evolutions can be agonizing. And I really spent too much time wondering if giving the squad members squad incendiary ammo was worth it.

Oh yea, and there's a drastic difference between my insanity and normal play styles on ME2. I can't say the same for the first game (biotic push+ guns blazing = PWNAGE)

[kraidy1117]

Spectre 7 wrote...


Flame Mass Effect all you want, at least I have to spend time thinking about the build before I run through the game. There are no overpowered weapons, so advanced training actually matters. Choosing between power evolutions can be agonizing. And I really spent too much time wondering if giving the squad members squad incendiary ammo was worth it.

Mattock and GPS want a word with you.

[wookieeassassin]

Bioware has already said that more RPG features are on the list of things to implement in ME3 so I don't think they are going to change that. In the small chance ME3 does end up like COD with dialogue and missions I'm going to be pissed though, even if it will still be a good game.

[casedawgz]

kraidy1117 wrote...

Spectre 7 wrote...


Flame Mass Effect all you want, at least I have to spend time thinking about the build before I run through the game. There are no overpowered weapons, so advanced training actually matters. Choosing between power evolutions can be agonizing. And I really spent too much time wondering if giving the squad members squad incendiary ammo was worth it.

Mattock and GPS want a word with you.

To be fair, the plasma shotgun only seems overpowered because the other shotguns are all crap.

[Niniva]

www.youtube.com/watch

I personally think 3 will be just fine, theyve already said theyre going for a better rpg experience than 2, and the games already likely deep into production.

I respectfully disagree.

Modifié par Niniva, 19 novembre 2010 - 03:46 .

[Spectre 7]

kraidy1117 wrote...
Mattock and GPS want a word with you.

When you bought three weapons for a video game with hard currency, you really shouldn't have expected anything else.

Modifié par Spectre 7, 19 novembre 2010 - 03:47 .

[xxSgt_Reed_24xx]

Spectre 7 wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...
Mattock and GPS want a word with you.

When you bought three weapons for a video game with hard currency, you really shouldn't have expected anything else.

LOL... ^This.

sorry, kraidy he's got ya there.

[kraidy1117]

Spectre 7 wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...
Mattock and GPS want a word with you.

When you bought three weapons for a video game with hard currency, you really shouldn't have expected anything else.

That's not the point. The point is you said ME2 has no OP wepaons, it does.

[MrFob]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
To be honest, the Mass Effect series was a godsend for me. I hate most pure shooters (they give me a headache) and I hate most pure RPGs (they're hellishly boring). ME took the things I liked from both of them and balanced them out so neither one could ruin the experience for me.

This perfectly sums up what I think/feel about this trilogy. they changed the second part, compared to the first, yes. Did they improve it? Did they dumb it down? Everyone will have their personal opinion on that. IMO the gameplay works. It worked in the first part and it works even better in the second one.
The only thing I can bitterly complain about, concerning ME2 is that the main plot (not the character missions) is crappy and wastes the potential of the first game.
Btu when I compare ME2 to ME1, I can see that they listened to the fans. It might not always have turned out the way everybody hoped but they did listen. Chances are they'll do the same concerning ME3.
As far as the OP is concerned: You have no basis for your pessimism. If this is about the new announcement of an announcement, we have no idea what's that even going to be, not to mention possible impact on ME3. It is incredible how excitation can be caused by wild speculations.

[Gibb_Shepard]

Theres no way this will be released before ME3.....i hope.

[f1r3storm]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

-Severian- wrote...

Lol. Fear-mongering ****** - take your wild accusations and pointless guesswork elsewhere.

Wild accusations and pointless guesswork huh? maybe you should just open your eyes and look at the current market trends in rpgs and the redesign in ME2 to see where they want the series to head.

So, if you would have opened your eyes, you should have seen BioWares plans for ME3, which include more RPG elements again.

[Epic777]

casedawgz wrote...

kraidy1117 wrote...

Spectre 7 wrote...


Flame Mass Effect all you want, at least I have to spend time thinking about the build before I run through the game. There are no overpowered weapons, so advanced training actually matters. Choosing between power evolutions can be agonizing. And I really spent too much time wondering if giving the squad members squad incendiary ammo was worth it.

Mattock and GPS want a word with you.

To be fair, the plasma shotgun only seems overpowered because the other shotguns are all crap.

The scimitar is the best vanguard weapon

[Sargeant Sarcasm]

CRISIS1717 wrote...

If we had been dictating it Mass Effect wouldn't have changed at all since people loved the first, whether or not you like or dislike ME2 gameplay is irrelevant because at the time Mass Effect came out people were looking forward to the game being exactly the same.

Oh God, here we go... :innocent:

Everything you stated is an opinion. You are stating it as if it were factual information. Yes, some people wanted ME2 to be more of the same, but there were a lot of people who wanted the game to improve on the weaker areas of the first Mass Effect and many people (including myself) feel that ME2 succeeded in that area.

Just because you may not have liked ME2's gameplay, that does not make it "irrelevant" for other people to like it. ME2 was praised by reviewers and was well recieved by the general public. You cannot ignore the facts.

[Phategod1]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Mass Effect 3 could play like f*cking solitaire for all I care so long as it and has the strong story and characters that made me like the series in the first place. Stats or no stats, guns or no guns, I'm here to save the galaxy alongside my team of epic badasses.

Your pessimism, it does nothing!

 

I agree with this I wish Everyone would stop complaining about things they have no idea about. Was ME2 a good game? If you say no then leave the franchise, quit posting on ME2 or give suggestions on how it could be better. But quit complaining about a product that doesn't even exist yet.

[Sargeant Sarcasm]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Mass Effect 3 could play like f*cking solitaire for all I care so long as it and has the strong story and characters that made me like the series in the first place. Stats or no stats, guns or no guns, I'm here to save the galaxy alongside my team of epic badasses.

Your pessimism, it does nothing!

Great... Now I'm wanting Mass Effect collectible cards. BioWare, get to it!

Modifié par Sargeant Sarcasm, 19 novembre 2010 - 10:43 .