224 réponses à ce sujet

[sinosleep]

revengeance wrote...

It's pretty much the same thing.

Um, no it's really not. A rock, paper, scissors system implies there are direct counters. Direct counters make it so that you DON'T simply have to shoot at things forever. If something has shields you use smgs, assault rifles, energy drain, or overload and it's like the enemy doesn't have an extra layer of defenses at all. That's THE EXACT OPPOSITE of simply shooting at things for a year.

[Homey C-Dawg]

giuliano wrote...

I dont think they should take the layers off , just make powers work on protected enemies and i agree on infantry not having a lot of protection , only bosses should have a lot.

You change your tactics drastically when adapting to hardcore/insanity. Anymore I'd find the game too simplistic tbh if biotics worked on defences (other than stripping them). The game would have to throw like 20 mercs at me every battle for it to be fun for me if I could just shockwave them all and pick them off while their shielded. I'm not trying to boast, just saying how the game gets easier and easier the more aggressively you learn to play, after a while even insanity can be blown through almost as quick as veteran.

Of course I've only played soldier a few times, (I like tech and biotic) so I can see how with soldier class it would get tedious doing nothing for defences except switching ammo powers.

[revengeance]

sinosleep wrote...

revengeance wrote...

It's pretty much the same thing.

Um, no it's really not. A rock, paper, scissors system implies there are direct counters. Direct counters make it so that you DON'T simply have to shoot at things forever. If something has shields you use smgs, assault rifles, energy drain, or overload and it's like the enemy doesn't have an extra layer of defenses at all. That's THE EXACT OPPOSITE of simply shooting at things for a year.

Listen, i am quite good at the game. I know how things work. Generally it takes forever on anything other than normal, and even when it does'nt it is still a really shallow system and it could be far better. If you are happy with it great! I am happy for you but honestly i think it stinks!! It does not add to the experience it just makes thing's take longer! It does not really get any more challenging just drawn out.

Modifié par revengeance, 19 décembre 2010 - 03:57 .

[ItsFreakinJesus]

They should've left it the same as it was in ME1. That way, despite shields and armor, biotic powers would still work.


edit: And by work, I mean Throw would still make enemies fly, despite the damage done being negligible due to the protection of their shields and armor.

Modifié par ItsFreakinJesus, 19 décembre 2010 - 04:05 .

[kmcd5722]

I just want to use biotics no matter what type of armor/barriers the enemy has. Being an adept in ME2 was only useful for warp. Otherwise, I hated not being able to use my powers at any stage of an opponents health like ME1. I get the cooldown system, that makes sense, but special protection because of barriers/armor doesn't.

[Googlesaurus]

I wouldn't have a problem with the shield/armor/barrier system if the results weren't so antithetical to their intended purpose and the AI was more varied in their combat approaches.

Good A.I. has been done before, decades actually. Games should not be like this. 

Modifié par Googlesaurus, 19 décembre 2010 - 04:17 .

[sinosleep]

Listen, i am quite good at the game. I know how things work. Generally it takes forever on anything other than normal, and even when it does'nt it is still a really shallow system and it could be far better. If you are happy with it great! I am happy for you but honestly i think it stinks!! It does not add to the experience it just makes thing's take longer! It does not really get any more challenging just drawn out.

Really?



4:01 4:05 I kill 3 guys on insanity in 4 seconds without simply filing them off a ledge. 

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 décembre 2010 - 04:15 .

[revengeance]

kmcd5722 wrote...

I just want to use biotics no matter what type of armor/barriers the enemy has. Being an adept in ME2 was only useful for warp. Otherwise, I hated not being able to use my powers at any stage of an opponents health like ME1. I get the cooldown system, that makes sense, but special protection because of barriers/armor doesn't.

Same.

[revengeance]

sinosleep wrote...

Listen, i am quite good at the game. I know how things work. Generally it takes forever on anything other than normal, and even when it does'nt it is still a really shallow system and it could be far better. If you are happy with it great! I am happy for you but honestly i think it stinks!! It does not add to the experience it just makes thing's take longer! It does not really get any more challenging just drawn out.

Really?



4:01 4:05 I kill 3 guys on insanity in 4 seconds without simply filing them off a ledge. 

Listen man, that's great and all but the system is basically designed to draw thing's out. Also those guy's were Corralled in a cluster what did you expect lol my engineer could do that too. Also i like my adept lol. The A.I always has the same approach to everything. You are only reinforcing my arguement it is not really any more challenging on differant difficulties.

This is the last response i will make to this post because in the end my arguement is that the system could be much better! The A.I could be much better! And the system is not that enjoyable to me! And that i also feel if my solution is too complex and costly there are many small tweaks that would make it much more enjoyable as some people in this forum have shown.

Modifié par revengeance, 19 décembre 2010 - 04:27 .

[sinosleep]

I'm not saying it's special or amazing, it's MY POINT that anyone can do it (it wouldn't help my case if it was only by my ubre greatness that I did it) and so your claim that it's the same thing as ME 1 immunity spam lets shoot forever nonsense that most other games go for is entirely disingenuous. A rock, paper, scissors system by virtue of being what is can't be compared to flat health boost that equates to nothing more than a time sink. Dislike what ME 2 does all you want, just don't sit here and lie about what it is.

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 décembre 2010 - 04:30 .

[revengeance]

sinosleep wrote...

I'm not saying it's special or amazing, it's MY POINT that anyone can do it (it wouldn't help my case if it was only by my ubre greatness that I did it) and so your claim that it's the same thing as ME 1 immunity spam lets shoot forever nonsense that most other games go for is entirely disingenuous. A rock, paper, scissors system by virtue of being what is can't be compared to flat health boost that equates to nothing more than a time sink. Dislike what ME 2 does all you want, just don't sit here and lie about what it is.

Well i just compared it, since it's my opinion. Both systems baically draw out combat it's never any differant always the same thing generally speaking. Although the fix to one would mainly be taking out immunity or tweaking it among other tweakage that could be dont to make it really fun. Again the main point of the post is to argue it is really not that fun. I mean if you simply play some of the other successful shooters on the market maybe you would see how shallow this one can be. Anyways don't sit here and say i am lying about an opinion lol.

Modifié par revengeance, 19 décembre 2010 - 04:45 .

[sinosleep]

My having the opinion that the sky is purple isn't any more wrong because of the fact that its my opinion. I hate when people try to go down that route in any debate, opinions can be just as wrong as any other way to make a statement.

Again, if the purpose was solely to waste the player's time they would have gone with a flat buff to health or what have you, instead they essentially turned it into a mini game. It's not the same thing.

As far as other successful shooters and the differences between difficulties being shallow? Make a list....

Gears = you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy
COD= you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy
Medal of Honor = you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy
Halo = you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy
ME 2= you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy ..... and they have a rock paper scissors defense system

Yes, so, so, shallow. At least with ME 2 there's something to go along with the same old you die quicker and there are more enemies with improved accuracy.

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 décembre 2010 - 04:58 .

[revengeance]

sinosleep wrote...

My having the opinion that the sky is purple isn't any more wrong because of the fact that its my opinion. I hate when people try to go down that route in any debate, opinions can be just as wrong as any other way to make a statement.

Again, if the purpose was solely to waste the player's time they would have gone with a flat buff to health or what have you, instead they essentially turned it into a mini game. It's not the same thing.

As far as other successful shooters and the differences between difficulties being shallow? Make a list....

Gears = you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy
COD= you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy
Medal of Honor = you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy
Halo = you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy
ME 2= you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy ..... and they have a rock paper scissors defense system

Yes, so, so, shallow. At least with ME 2 there's something to go along with the same old you die quicker and there are more enemies with improved accuracy.

I am right.

Ok at their most basic yes that is how scaling works in those games I'll give you that. I don't even know why i am arguing this my OP cover's exactly how i feel and is open to debate i have no more too say. The OP cover's suggestion and feeling's on current norms for ME 2 and some other shooters and how i think things could be improved a little. Halo CE in it's time had great A.I. Fear has groundbreaking A.I ... I just hope bioware will take some idea's from these guy's to mix it up a little bit. And make it so that my Adept is a little more fun to play at some points.

[Googlesaurus]

sinosleep wrote...

Halo = you die quicker there are more enemies with improved accuracy

Did you play the original Halo? There was a lot more than that. 

Modifié par Googlesaurus, 19 décembre 2010 - 05:51 .

[sinosleep]

Nope, but I did beat 2 and 3 on legendary and played through bits of ODST (didn't buy it and as such didn't beat it). Don't recall there being more than dying quicker and more enemies with improved accuracy.

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 décembre 2010 - 05:56 .

[Googlesaurus]

sinosleep wrote...

Nope, but I did beat 2 and 3 on legendary and played through bits of ODST (didn't buy it and as such didn't beat it). Don't recall there being more than dying quicker and more enemies with improved accuracy.

That's pretty much how it worked. There's also that grenade throwing increase. 

Same thing in CE: improved accuracy, faster fire rate, higher damage per shot. Same amount of enemies though. Big difference in A.I.: Elites were much smarter, Hunters more aggressive. They toned it down for the causals in later games. 

[lazuli]

kmcd5722 wrote...

I just want to use biotics no matter what type of armor/barriers the enemy has. Being an adept in ME2 was only useful for warp. Otherwise, I hated not being able to use my powers at any stage of an opponents health like ME1. I get the cooldown system, that makes sense, but special protection because of barriers/armor doesn't.

Lots of people get that impression of the Adept on higher difficulties.  Check out the strategy forum for tips on how to play an effective Adept that doesn't just spam Warp on recharge.  In case you'd rather not visit the strategy forum, I'll provide two simple tips:

1) Be aggressive.
2) Use Singularity.

[adam_grif]

opinions can be just as wrong as any other way to make a statement.

Nope, opinions are by definition subjective, if someone says "in my opinion the sky is green", that isn't an opinion, they're using the word incorrectly.



Subjective things can never be proven right or wrong, ever.

[kmcd5722]

lazuli wrote...

Lots of people get that impression of the Adept on higher difficulties.  Check out the strategy forum for tips on how to play an effective Adept that doesn't just spam Warp on recharge.  In case you'd rather not visit the strategy forum, I'll provide two simple tips:

1) Be aggressive.
2) Use Singularity.

Thank you, but really, no thanks.  Singularity helped to slow enemies down and allow for a few free shots, but it was not as BA as it was in ME1.  I loved playing as an Adept in ME1 because I felt powerful and diversified in my attacks. The Adept is static in ME2.  Besides, I will be the first to admit I don't like being aggressive in a game I am told to be tactical. I don't feel rewarded dying every five times being aggressive to the one time I survive playing tactically. 

I respect your response, but, in my opinion, automatic defenses against biotics doesn't make the game any fun.

Modifié par kmcd5722, 19 décembre 2010 - 08:00 .

[sinosleep]

Nope, opinions are by definition subjective, if someone says "in my opinion the sky is green", that isn't an opinion, they're using the word incorrectly.



Subjective things can never be proven right or wrong, ever.

The things we were discussing weren't subjective either, hence the analogy. It taking forever to kill standard enemies on difficulties higher than normal is not something that's subjective, that's an outright falsity, about a million ME 2 insanity videos on youtube prove that. The fact that one shot weapons will one shot enemies regardless of difficulty prove that.

Many people seem to think that by simply putting an IMO before or after commenting on a statement of fact that they are somehow above reproach when that's not the case.

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 décembre 2010 - 07:39 .

[Arijharn]

ItsFreakinJesus wrote...
 And by work, I mean Throw would still make enemies fly, despite the damage done being negligible due to the protection of their shields and armor.

That is the biggest problem with how the current system works now. I don't see the point in taking any points in Throw (other than to unlock other ability's) because other skills are as useful anyway.

If you play an Adept, your biggest strength is biotics, so why is it that I spend much more time shooting things than I do using biotic ability's?

[adam_grif]

The things we were discussing weren't subjective either, hence the analogy. It taking forever to kill standard enemies on difficulties higher than normal is not something that's subjective, that's an outright falsity, about a million ME 2 insanity videos on youtube prove that. The fact that one shot weapons will one shot enemies regardless of difficulty prove that.

But his point wasn't "it's impossible for guns to kill things rapidly on insanity", but rather that guns generally don't. The opinion part is that it takes too long on average. It's only when you're min-maxing your character (i.e. Widow infiltrator w/ assassin cloak and AP ammo) that you get things like that. For a good portion of the game before you get access to your good toys like that you can't ("my level 20 vanguard with optimal build and good aim can do it, so obviously enemies die quickly on insanity!"), and there are no shortage of enemies that are tougher to kill than your average Vorcha or Blue suns merc, and these cannot be one-shotted on this difficulty.

This is like the time someone said to me that enemies in Gears of War aren't bullet sponges because "dude you can kill enemies with headshots using the sniper rifle!" and "The magnum revolver only takes 2 headshots to kill!". It's totally missing the point. Those circumstances are not applicable for every person in every situation, and generally aren't.

I'm playing an infiltrator as I described above, and 90% of the enemies still take a long time to kill because I don't want to waste widow ammo on regular enemies in firefights, so I whittle them down with my SMG+AP or disruptor ammo. It takes like 1/2 of a magazine to their head to kill most enemies, more when your aim is off.

Modifié par adam_grif, 19 décembre 2010 - 11:24 .

[BattleRaptor]

sinosleep
Im afriad harder difficulty on me2

Reduces the damage you do with powers.
Reduces the Health of your squad mates
Increases the health,defence,shields of the enemy.
Increases the damage they do, NOT there accuracy.
Reduces how long your powers last, powers on insanity only last half the time.

I would also point people to look at the engineers in his video.... they dont appear to have shields before he has even shot at them....
Insanity... or easy?

Modifié par BattleRaptor, 19 décembre 2010 - 12:41 .

[sinosleep]

BattleRaptor, you've got to be blind or you didn't see the video. I cast overload on the ships as they are coming down which removes shields you ****ing idiot. It's the nice shiny blue animation that's going off around them.

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 décembre 2010 - 03:55 .

[sinosleep]

adam_grif wrote...

But his point wasn't "it's impossible for guns to kill things rapidly on insanity", but rather that guns generally don't. The opinion part is that it takes too long on average. It's only when you're min-maxing your character (i.e. Widow infiltrator w/ assassin cloak and AP ammo) that you get things like that. For a good portion of the game before you get access to your good toys like that you can't ("my level 20 vanguard with optimal build and good aim can do it, so obviously enemies die quickly on insanity!"), and there are no shortage of enemies that are tougher to kill than your average Vorcha or Blue suns merc, and these cannot be one-shotted on this difficulty.

This is like the time someone said to me that enemies in Gears of War aren't bullet sponges because "dude you can kill enemies with headshots using the sniper rifle!" and "The magnum revolver only takes 2 headshots to kill!". It's totally missing the point. Those circumstances are not applicable for every person in every situation, and generally aren't.

I'm playing an infiltrator as I described above, and 90% of the enemies still take a long time to kill because I don't want to waste widow ammo on regular enemies in firefights, so I whittle them down with my SMG+AP or disruptor ammo. It takes like 1/2 of a magazine to their head to kill most enemies, more when your aim is off.

Plenty of enemies other than vorcha? Most of the enemies you fight are of the blue suns variety actually. So this claim that there are SOOOOOOOOO many enemies that don't wilt like flowers in the heat is, once again, a falsity. The average battle in this game is composed of a bunch of your standard blue suns mooks and all of ONE enemy that has more defenses than usual. You might get ONE blue suns legionnare for every 5 standard blue suns mercs. So that arguement is ENTIRELY overblown, and even if you got more ... 

I've got more video that disproves that they somehow take 20 bullets to the face to kill. All of lvl 9, I take out an "elite"  mob in 1 second from 50 sec to 51 sec using my shotgun.

Look you just NAME a damned level and I will curb stomp it on insanity with the class of your choice and post a video of it and then you go ahead and continue to tell me that spending all of 1 or 2 seconds on enemies is so unbearably long.

Modifié par sinosleep, 19 décembre 2010 - 04:17 .