145 réponses à ce sujet

[Ship.wreck_]

rokeeb wrote...
Seriously though, for the Gernsback (spelling?) crew dropping ammo, I think that maybe the crew are using the old weapons, but shepard can remove the heatsinks from their guns and put them into his. That would explain the ammo, and that way, You can say that not ALL the guns in the game use the same heatsink system as Shepard.

Also, why does everyone think that all of the old guns just had to dissappear? Why can't whichever guns use the new system just have been retrofitted old guns?

How could Shepard just pop out the built in thermal clip on an old gun, and even if he could why would it just pop into a new gun designed to take interchangeable clips? At the very least it would take tools and time. Plus it would be like just poping out the built in magazine in a WWII M1 and just "poping" it into your M16, sorry dude, no dice. The thermal clip explanation didn't mention anything about reverse compatibility. It's a nice way of thinking about it, on a personal level but not exactly cannon. The problem here is that the game is violating the game's own cannon and trying to lie to us about it at the same time. See my post above.

Because they did. Retrofited old guns don't count as old guns, they've been retrofited to function as and therefore are new guns. By old guns it is meant guns that work just like the original ME guns. If there are no guns that you can pick up and use exactly like those old guns, then there are no old guns in the game. Furthermore if you look at the enemies operating their guns anywhere in the game including the Gernsback, they reload them the same way shepard does, proving once and for all... no old guns anywhere in the game. Which makes not sense not that the new guns make sense anyway, see my above post.

Love the idea of thermal clips for the record, but that's not what we got. They told us they were giving us thermal clips to alieviate overheating issues, but really just gave us regular magazines full of bullets just like todays guns instead. Again see my post above.

[yoda23]

Slidell505 wrote...

Mass Effect has a ****ton of plotholes. Accept it.

NO

[Ship.wreck_]

yoda23 wrote...

Slidell505 wrote...

Mass Effect has a ****ton of plotholes. Accept it.

NO

I concur.

NO!

[Praetor Knight]

Building off of what Ship.wreck mentioned, it would be cool if Shep had a device that would actively cool the ejectable thermal clips, using the tech found in the Avalanche HW.

So for example, you just fired off the Mattock and you eject the hot thermal clip, then place in the cooling device as you grab a cool thermal clip.

The Device could be kept above Shep's right hip on a belt maybe.



Thoughts?

[Ship.wreck_]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Building off of what Ship.wreck mentioned, it would be cool if Shep had a device that would actively cool the ejectable thermal clips, using the tech found in the Avalanche HW.
So for example, you just fired off the Mattock and you eject the hot thermal clip, then place in the cooling device as you grab a cool thermal clip.
The Device could be kept above Shep's right hip on a belt maybe.

Thoughts?

I think not necessary if they just did them right and let them cool at all, but still a cool idea. Could be an upgrade just to make sure you never fall in need of a cool clip.

One guy made something up about the clips warping and becoming unusable / dangerous. But that doesn't make any sense, the original built in heat sink didnt suffer any warping or degredation after infinite re-uses why would the removable version fail after one? Especially when that would be such an obvious design flaw.

Another guy said something about the clips would take WAY too long to cool because the shooting process creates SO MUCH heat. But that doesn't make any sense either, if that was the case it would have taken the original built in versions just as long to cool, if not longer because they're inside. The removable version would cool even faster than the original after being ejected just because it's exposed directly to air.

For some reason some people just refuse to acknowledge that the whole "thermal clip" rhetoric was just a poorly disguised lie to introduce limited amunition to the game, and that none of the premises the treat the "thermal clips" like anything other than what they really are (just mags full of bullets) don't make any sense. Because thermal clips don't act like thermal clips in the game, they really just act like mags full of bullets, and there's no explanation for why. And there can't be because the whole idea was just a lie to cover up limited ammo.

[Praetor Knight]

Yeah, that's why I wondered if the device could contain a Boss-Einstein condensate that could make the thermal clips colder and also make it optional, instead of necessary to pick up clips as you move through an area.

And allows for "unlimited firing" as in ME, with "disposable" thermal clips. Hopefully in ME3. :innocent:

Modifié par Praetor Shepard, 11 décembre 2010 - 08:37 .

[Ship.wreck_]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Yeah, that's why I wondered if the device could contain a Boss-Einstein condensate that could make the thermal clips colder and also make it optional, instead of necessary to pick up clips as you move through an area.

And allows for "unlimited firing" as in ME, with "disposable" thermal clips. Hopefully in ME3. :innocent:

The thing is that if thermal clips were really thermal clips they would be perpetually re-usable just like the built in version, except you can change them out rather than waiting to shoot your gun, then just let them cool there on your belt / in your upgrade clip cooler. Until you need to switch to a cool clip again.

[Vaenier]

I think thermal clips were made to be a liquid that would absord the heat and evaporate in the process. Its the only possible logical reasoning why you could not use the thermal clips repeatedly...

Guns should still have had their unlimited ammo thing, but be able to put on a thermal clip to rapidly suck out the heat and then be able to continue firing if you fail and overheat your gun.

[Sparda Stonerule]

You do realize that the heat the thermal clips absorb is immense. So placing it in a cooling unit would just make it brittle and easier to break. Leading to dangerous weapon malfunctions. Besides as I said earlier, thermal clips allow for pellets of different sizes allowing for weapons that can inflict more damage to a target then the ME 1 weapons. Every pellet was the same size in ME 1 no matter the gun because they all used ammo bricks that you yourself never had to switch out. Shaving off pellets and accelerating them is all well and good, but having specialized rounds that you can fire with a heat absorption clip is quite a bit more effective.



This took a bit a research on Mass Effect lore and should be more clearly explained. Then again people could use some common sense and realize that this is in fact a game.

[Sparda Stonerule]

Vaenier wrote...

I think thermal clips were made to be a liquid that would absord the heat and evaporate in the process. Its the only possible logical reasoning why you could not use the thermal clips repeatedly...
Guns should still have had their unlimited ammo thing, but be able to put on a thermal clip to rapidly suck out the heat and then be able to continue firing if you fail and overheat your gun.

You do realize that is not how heat works right? Putting a clip into a hot gun would do nothing because it absorbs generated heat not existing heat. This is because existing heat has time to spread throughout the gun, generated heat can be directed to a specific place but only at the moment it is generated. After it is generated heat does spread.

[Ship.wreck_]

Vaenier wrote...

I think thermal clips were made to be a liquid that would absord the heat and evaporate in the process. Its the only possible logical reasoning why you could not use the thermal clips repeatedly...
Guns should still have had their unlimited ammo thing, but be able to put on a thermal clip to rapidly suck out the heat and then be able to continue firing if you fail and overheat your gun.

Well they act exactly like a magazine full of bullets. I mean exactly, there's no function differnece in terms of game play between a thermal clip in ME2 and a magazine in Counterstrike or COD. So we can make up a buch of reasons that aren't in any codex or other official account of the thermal clips in order to explain away that striking similarity...

Or we can just accept the truth that they really are just magazines of bullets called by a different name. I personally choose the later.

[Vaenier]

Ship.wreck wrote...

Or we can just accept the truth that they really are just magazines of bullets called by a different name. I personally choose the later.

Exactly, they are just like a magazine of bullets, but instead of bullets, they have a limited amount of coolant. Magazines of coolant.

[Ship.wreck_]

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

You do realize that the heat the thermal clips absorb is immense. So placing it in a cooling unit would just make it brittle and easier to break. Leading to dangerous weapon malfunctions. Besides as I said earlier, thermal clips allow for pellets of different sizes allowing for weapons that can inflict more damage to a target then the ME 1 weapons. Every pellet was the same size in ME 1 no matter the gun because they all used ammo bricks that you yourself never had to switch out. Shaving off pellets and accelerating them is all well and good, but having specialized rounds that you can fire with a heat absorption clip is quite a bit more effective.

This took a bit a research on Mass Effect lore and should be more clearly explained. Then again people could use some common sense and realize that this is in fact a game.

Yeah future allows/ceramics would easily explain that alot better than the excuses they don't cool I've been hearing, so excuse fail. Is there really anything to support that whole different slug sizes theory? I'm not talking about words in a codex hear, those are obviously less than reliable as this was obviously just a poorly veiled attempt to limit ammunition and use different words for an explanation why. Why I mean by support, do the weapons actually vary their own damage and do they do more damage persay than the original guns in the gameplay. If you play the game anything you shoot isn't really any harder or easier to kill with new guns in new game vs old guns in old game.

If it looks like a magazine, and acts like a magazine and works like a magazine, ITS A MAGAZINE. You can write whatever you want in the codex and we can make up any excuses we want in this forum... but none of it changes that IT'S JUST A MAGAZINE.

[Ship.wreck_]

Vaenier wrote...

Ship.wreck wrote...

Or we can just accept the truth that they really are just magazines of bullets called by a different name. I personally choose the later.

Exactly, they are just like a magazine of bullets, but instead of bullets, they have a limited amount of coolant. Magazines of coolant.

It doesn't make any difference if we call it bullets or coolent, if it acts the same, it IS the same. Just limited ammo by so many names, even though the games premise makes limited ammo a thing of the past.

So whatever name you use the thermal clips as we see them are a direct violation of the games premis.

[Vaenier]

Ship.wreck wrote...

Vaenier wrote...

Ship.wreck wrote...

Or we can just accept the truth that they really are just magazines of bullets called by a different name. I personally choose the later.

Exactly, they are just like a magazine of bullets, but instead of bullets, they have a limited amount of coolant. Magazines of coolant.

It doesn't make any difference if we call it bullets or coolent, if it acts the same, it IS the same. Just limited ammo by so many names, even though the games premise makes limited ammo a thing of the past.

So whatever name you use the thermal clips as we see them are a direct violation of the games premis.

You have a magazine of "ability to shoot"
One shot uses up an "ability to shoot" and when you dont have any more, the gun becomes useless.
mass effect 1 used a unique and amazing infinite ammo system. and there is no way to disguise the nerf that ME2 made.

[AmstradHero]

"Plothole". You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
It was explained, and it was a change made to improve gameplay. Mass Effect fields are still being used to fire the bullets, so the game's premise has not been violated.

Vaenier wrote...
mass effect 1 used a unique and amazing infinite ammo system. and there is no way to disguise the nerf that ME2 made.

You mean "amazing" as in "sit and wait and do nothing until your gun becomes usable again"? I'm glad those days are gone. It was an interesting experiment from the point of view of game mechanics, but it doesn't make for engaging gameplay.
Waiting != fun.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 11 décembre 2010 - 09:40 .

[Sparda Stonerule]

Ship.wreck wrote...

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

You do realize that the heat the thermal clips absorb is immense. So placing it in a cooling unit would just make it brittle and easier to break. Leading to dangerous weapon malfunctions. Besides as I said earlier, thermal clips allow for pellets of different sizes allowing for weapons that can inflict more damage to a target then the ME 1 weapons. Every pellet was the same size in ME 1 no matter the gun because they all used ammo bricks that you yourself never had to switch out. Shaving off pellets and accelerating them is all well and good, but having specialized rounds that you can fire with a heat absorption clip is quite a bit more effective.

This took a bit a research on Mass Effect lore and should be more clearly explained. Then again people could use some common sense and realize that this is in fact a game.

Yeah future allows/ceramics would easily explain that alot better than the excuses they don't cool I've been hearing, so excuse fail. Is there really anything to support that whole different slug sizes theory? I'm not talking about words in a codex hear, those are obviously less than reliable as this was obviously just a poorly veiled attempt to limit ammunition and use different words for an explanation why. Why I mean by support, do the weapons actually vary their own damage and do they do more damage persay than the original guns in the gameplay. If you play the game anything you shoot isn't really any harder or easier to kill with new guns in new game vs old guns in old game.

If it looks like a magazine, and acts like a magazine and works like a magazine, ITS A MAGAZINE. You can write whatever you want in the codex and we can make up any excuses we want in this forum... but none of it changes that IT'S JUST A MAGAZINE.

My only support is anecdotal. However you can actually see the bullet profile when you fire. The slug of the widow is bigger than the slug of the Locust. The bullets from the Revenant are bigger than those fired by the Avenger.

I wasn't arguing that yes it is artificially limiting ammo, but it can in fact make sense. Besides ME 1 had a rather funny plothole concerning its ammo. It had an ammo brick inside every gun that would eventually run out and need to be replaced. However no matter how long you stood there and held the trigger it would never ever run out. Not that anyone talks about that but oh well. Apples and oranges I suppose. My main point is that thermal clips can absorb more heat then a gun itself without causing damage to the gun. This can allow for more bullets to be fired in a shorter time. It can also theoretically allow for guns that pack more of a punch because they can produce more heat. After all a combination of friction and mass can generate more heat.

It's not even a big deal. It's just that the things people argue about on these forums are completely astonishing.

[RiouHotaru]

ship.wreck, the ONLY thing your long wall of text says is that gameplay mechanic =/= story explanation. This has been the case and the single reason WHY there's this discrepancy. I mean really, how often do we have to keep bringing it up? The story reason given for the upgrade makes PERFECT sense when applied to the setting. When applied to the actual mechanic used for in-game combat? Yes, it feels like a cheap excuse to have an "ammo" counter.



But once again, Story vs. Gameplay Segregation is in full effect. Always has been, always will be.

[Praetor Knight]

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

My only support is anecdotal. However you can actually see the bullet profile when you fire. The slug of the widow is bigger than the slug of the Locust. The bullets from the Revenant are bigger than those fired by the Avenger.

I wasn't arguing that yes it is artificially limiting ammo, but it can in fact make sense. Besides ME 1 had a rather funny plothole concerning its ammo. It had an ammo brick inside every gun that would eventually run out and need to be replaced. However no matter how long you stood there and held the trigger it would never ever run out. Not that anyone talks about that but oh well.

Well, I figured that the Omnitool can restock the ammo brick that is used to create the different sized slugs. But I can't remember if I read that or not in a Codex entry.

My main point is that thermal clips can absorb more heat then a gun itself without causing damage to the gun. This can allow for more bullets to be fired in a shorter time. It can also theoretically allow for guns that pack more of a punch because they can produce more heat. After all a combination of friction and mass can generate more heat.

The thermal clips could be ceramic, and ceramic can hold more heat than metal without warping or getting more brittle.

But I've not read anything that goes into any detail as to how thermal clips are made, just that they exist.

Also, heat generation is typically an inefficiency in a system, meaning that heat is a wasted energy, so heat sinks are more a band aid for the systems, both in ME and ME2.

[Zurcior]

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

Ship.wreck wrote...

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

You do realize that the heat the thermal clips absorb is immense. So placing it in a cooling unit would just make it brittle and easier to break. Leading to dangerous weapon malfunctions. Besides as I said earlier, thermal clips allow for pellets of different sizes allowing for weapons that can inflict more damage to a target then the ME 1 weapons. Every pellet was the same size in ME 1 no matter the gun because they all used ammo bricks that you yourself never had to switch out. Shaving off pellets and accelerating them is all well and good, but having specialized rounds that you can fire with a heat absorption clip is quite a bit more effective.

This took a bit a research on Mass Effect lore and should be more clearly explained. Then again people could use some common sense and realize that this is in fact a game.

Yeah future allows/ceramics would easily explain that alot better than the excuses they don't cool I've been hearing, so excuse fail. Is there really anything to support that whole different slug sizes theory? I'm not talking about words in a codex hear, those are obviously less than reliable as this was obviously just a poorly veiled attempt to limit ammunition and use different words for an explanation why. Why I mean by support, do the weapons actually vary their own damage and do they do more damage persay than the original guns in the gameplay. If you play the game anything you shoot isn't really any harder or easier to kill with new guns in new game vs old guns in old game.

If it looks like a magazine, and acts like a magazine and works like a magazine, ITS A MAGAZINE. You can write whatever you want in the codex and we can make up any excuses we want in this forum... but none of it changes that IT'S JUST A MAGAZINE.

My only support is anecdotal. However you can actually see the bullet profile when you fire. The slug of the widow is bigger than the slug of the Locust. The bullets from the Revenant are bigger than those fired by the Avenger.

I wasn't arguing that yes it is artificially limiting ammo, but it can in fact make sense. Besides ME 1 had a rather funny plothole concerning its ammo. It had an ammo brick inside every gun that would eventually run out and need to be replaced. However no matter how long you stood there and held the trigger it would never ever run out. Not that anyone talks about that but oh well. Apples and oranges I suppose. My main point is that thermal clips can absorb more heat then a gun itself without causing damage to the gun. This can allow for more bullets to be fired in a shorter time. It can also theoretically allow for guns that pack more of a punch because they can produce more heat. After all a combination of friction and mass can generate more heat.

It's not even a big deal. It's just that the things people argue about on these forums are completely astonishing.

 This person speaks the truth. You should all listen to him.
 Seriously though, I've been trying to say this to opponents of the thermal clips for a long time.

[Ship.wreck_]

Ugh people. All I'm saying here is that they lied to us about the whole thermal clip thing and made it seem like it was going to work in a way that it doesn't when really it's just limited ammo, and that if they're going to take away unlimited ammo they should have owned up to it in the first place and just said, "We're taking away unlimited ammo, deal with it, at least your weapon won't overheat anymore."

If they're going to talk to us about thermal clips they should have given us what they promised in that your gun works exactly the same as always with unlimited ammo shots whatever you want to call it except no more waiting for weapon cooldown when you screw up and overheat.

EDIT
One or the other not tell me one and give me the other. That's all I'm asking for here. It's not that they limited ammo that bugs me so much here just that they tried to explain it all away with a broken logic and expected me to buy it. Just tell me what you're doing straight up and don't try to obscure it, is that so much to ask?

Modifié par Ship.wreck , 11 décembre 2010 - 10:31 .

[Sable Phoenix]

lazuli wrote...

It's all about gameplay. Story and characters should make sense from a lore perspective. Gameplay, within reasonable limits, should not be bound by the same rules. I would argue that switching the ammo system falls within reasonable limits, though I know there are plenty who disagree with me.

It doesn't.

I defy anyone to explain how switching the game from an overheating system (that is uncommon among shooter games), which was designed to limit rate of fire, to an ammo system (that we see in every other shooter game), which was designed to limit rate of fire, actually improved the gameplay in any form.

[Ship.wreck_]

People will argue that it's "better" with limited ammo vs overheating but that's really just personal preference.

They way they explained it in the codex / game book it should have been both! Unlimited ammo AND a bypass to the overheating problem AND it would have made perfect sense in the context of the game.

[Sable Phoenix]

True, but the thermal clips would have remained just as unnecessary a change in that situation.

[Spartas Husky]

Ship.wreck wrote...

Check this out Spartas Husky:

If they're really just interchangeable heatsinks then the ones you eject will still cooldown like they would in the gun. So you could hold onto ejected clips and re-use them when the cool down, (or even before they cool down completely just won't have as much capacity). So you could just carry enough clips that by time you're burning through the last clip the first is full cooled, then by time you're re burning the first the second has cooled, and endless cycle of re-using clips and never having to wait for your gun or any one specific clip to cool!

Plus the gun should still be able to fire in the old school mode if you don't happen to have any clips handy somehow.

But like I said, although they explained it as "thermal clips" it was really just traditional limited ammo all allong. Any attempt to reconcile the explanation of thermal clips in the codex or game booklet with the actuall gameplay of thermal clips will fail, because the explanation was a lie.

Here's somethig about ammo types. Believe it or not with today's technology it's possible to load more than one type of ammo into a magazine and thus achieve the effects of multiple different ammo type in every load! In fact I was in the Navy and that was standard procedure. We'd load machine guns with a nasty cocktail of ammo types. Most rounds were standard, but every 5th would be a tracer round, and I forget the other numbers but let's say every 8th would be armor peircing and every 3rd would be explosive and every 7th would be incindiary etc.

So you should be able to program your ME future gun to cycle through ammo modes as your fire in the same way, or even get an upgrade that detects an enemy's defenses and automatically swithches ammo types accordingly. Everytime you aim at an enemy with sheilds the gun automatically shoots disrupter ammo, armor you auto shoot ap or incindiary etc etc. That would've been a sick upgrade! Becaues I spent alot of time slowly swithching ammo types in that game. Oh, he has sheilds equip disrupter, oops this guy has armor and he flanking me, swith to ap, uh-oh sheilds guy is kicking my but swith back to disrupter.... and some times I just had to shoot someone with an inefective ammo just because I didn't have time to switch back and forth. And that sucks when you've got limited ammo so you have to make your shots count as much as possible...

true enough, although for ... gameplay sake, I would have SOME weapons.. hint hint 'WEAPONS' out of many hint hint. That once they use a clip they burn it... maybe like the plasma shotgun, if you fire normally is fine, but if you  charge the thing it burns the sink... or breaks it w/e you want to call it.

Best of both worlds really. ALthough in reality if I use a magazine I could essentially "keep" the magazine from todays rifles, but most dont go through the trouble of gathering the magazines since they are easily manufactured... unless of course the scenario is high risk and low probability of being supplied in which case you take longer to reload because you keep your spent magazines just in case.

Now in the event of Shep... most likely he will be able to reload or resupply from enemies so no point in keeping ejected heat sinks... although they should become good in a few secs.

Idea:

You use the m8 avenger. 1 sink provides energy absorbtion aka energy for 40 bullets.

If you use controlled pairs or 3 burst mode the cooldown is fast enough to work in between burst so you can basically fire indefinetily with one sink. But if you fire 10 shots in one go, it might fill 1/3 of the way. Which if you wait it can take 2 secs to cool off, not meaning you wont be able to fire, but if you want to go back to 0 heat it takes longer amount of time, the longer the bursts are. But IF YOU burn through all 40 and you dont want to eject the sink, it takes 8 secs instead since you over charged the thing.

But the option is there for you to just burn through, and eject at will, so you basically have a light machine gun type of supressive fire.

But like I said before. Even though you said weapons should be able to fire without a sink... that is not right I think since the weapon needs somewhere to store the heat otherwise they start to breakdown, at least that is what I remember from the ME1 codex, the heat from mass accelerators is too big to be vented normally.

So when you are left with ONE sink only. You are not able to eject it