262 réponses à ce sujet

[bjdbwea]

Wildfire Darkstar wrote...

What you see as "clumpsy traditional RPG features" that "destroy this beautiful cinematic Mass Effect universe" are the very features that I would argue make the Mass Effect series enjoyable as something beyond a movie (or, perhaps, a choose-your-own-adventure book). That is, since you don't like the features in question, of course you see them as obsolete. I do like those very same features in their own right (and not as a necessary evil because of limitations of the medium), so I certainly don't see them as obsolete.

I agree. A good story is an important part of a game, but another important part is the actual gameplay. And there, I do not think that RPG elements are obsolete at all, on the contrary. They add a lot of replayability. Why many people seem to prefer simple and linear pew-pew is somewhat beyond me. Or maybe they think that the perfect game is just an interactive movie? I certainly do not agree with that.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 03 janvier 2011 - 01:16 .

[Lumikki]

Some traditional RPG elements as been obsolete in computer games is not same as RPG elements been obsolete. I also did not say anything about linearity. Don't make BS assumptions, when it was not sayed.

Modifié par Lumikki, 03 janvier 2011 - 02:32 .

[Felfenix]

I'd rather we not bring back the horrible mechanics of ME1, and actually bring in some good RPG mechanics.

I f I wanna play with a spreadsheet, I'll open an Excel file. I fail to see why people think that if a game actually has gameplay, instead of just grinding points into a spreadsheet and then mindlessly button mashing, that it's not an RPG. Maybe I just naively believe an RPG can be more than a game for people who suck at games and wanna make up for it with "stats" and grinding.

There are very simple changes that could go a long way to improving the ME series as an RPG without losing anything. Showing the stats (that DO exist under the table in ME2) and broader information about your weapons, for example. How come when we go to the armory or weapon loadout we can't see ammo, ammo per clip, rate of fire, damage, range, and accuracy/spread for each weapon? How come we don't see exactly how much more damage a specific weapon may do to each damage type (shield, health, armor, and barrier)? Also, it would be nice to make the healthbar layers more meaningful, and not as linear. Armor/Shields/Health/Barrier have different weaknesses and strengths for enemies, and all but health restrict ability usage. It would be interesting if instead of just overlapping health bars, if they were seperate bars that blocked different type of damage, more like ME1, and if it worked this way for Shepard, too.

I think the most important RPG improvements though would be adding more conversations and depth to your companions. In both ME1 and ME2, you only get about three short conversations. I'd love to see more companion interaction with each other, like the ME1 elevators, too. Why aren't Jack and Miranda constantly fighting when I bring them together, like Morrigan and Leliana did in DAO?


The ME series doesn't ONLY need improvements in the RPG department though. ME1 and ME2 both have VERY sluggish controls. Cover feels slow and unreactive. There aren't very many combat options. It would be nice to roll between cover points or something, for example. ME2 did a lot to improve weapon diversity, but it could still be a lot better, and powers are just... lackluster. Most people play soldier and well... why play anything else? They need to work on both balancing and improving powers. It's lame that they're either underwhelming, or overpowered. Also, swapping weapons is way too slow. Swapping weapons on the fly as the situation warrants should be the goal. You shouldn't feel punished for swapping weapons, and shouldn't wanna just stick with one weapon. Using ammo to force people to swap, while keeping it so sluggish, undiverse, and underwhelming just ticked everybody off. You should wanna use all your weapons because they are all good and fun, not because of another punishing mechanic like ammo.

Modifié par Felfenix, 03 janvier 2011 - 02:53 .

[Ponchoe]

I just want them to remove this "good" and "bad" system. Can't we just have options and then repercussions/rewards after?

[Mr. MannlyMan]

Felfenix wrote...

There are very simple changes that could go a long way to improving the ME series as an RPG without losing anything. Showing the stats (that DO exist under the table in ME2) and broader information about your weapons, for example. How come when we go to the armory or weapon loadout we can't see ammo, ammo per clip, rate of fire, damage, range, and accuracy/spread for each weapon? How come we don't see exactly how much more damage a specific weapon may do to each damage type (shield, health, armor, and barrier)?

I'd much rather have an in-character stat breakdown, to be honest. That way, it could be viewed less as a simple item stat, and more of a lore description of the weapon.

Here's how: bring back the skill descriptions from ME1 that explain how many kilograms of force a biotic throw generates, for example. For assault rifles, it could be represented as the gun's peak velocity:

Avenger M8: average projectile velocity = 1100m/s
                   average force of impact: 120N
                   kickback: 30N
                   rate of fire: 10.2/s
                   average force per second: 1224N

You could switch between graphs and charts to find a breakdown that suits your needs; this would make sense, seeing as how EDI is there for Shepard's convenience.

So, in other words, it could be displayed on another chart as:

Avenger M8: base weapon damage: 120N
                   accuracy: 80% (100% meaning there is zero kickback)
                   rate of fire: 10.2/s
                   damage per second: 1224N



If not, then just give us a concise and effective chart graph showing:

Weapon:
Damage
Rate of Fire
Accuracy
Damage per second

Armor:
Shields
Armor
Mobility
Ammunition
Speed
Melee

Something to that effect.
                  

[TheNexus]

As long as the game is fun, I'm cool with whatever Bioware wants to do.



But it should be noted that part of Mass Effect's fun is its replay value, and the more RPG elements they put in ME3, the longer its replay value would be.

[Rykoth]

ME1's inventory was annoying as hell.

Yes, let's get 5 billion upgrades that get melted into omnigel anyway.

Let's get armor to equip on characters that they don't even wear in the Normandy. (hello Garrus/Wrex/Tali)



I like companions having their own unique outfits. IF they add armor upgrades, make it fit for the characters. Tali for instance, shouldn't be changing her whole entire environmental suit because she gets a better piece of armor.

[james1976]

Felfenix wrote...


I think the most important RPG improvements though would be adding more conversations and depth to your companions. In both ME1 and ME2, you only get about three short conversations. I'd love to see more companion interaction with each other, like the ME1 elevators, too. Why aren't Jack and Miranda constantly fighting when I bring them together, like Morrigan and Leliana did in DAO?

That would indeed be good.  I miss the party discussion on the road.

Garrus did pick with Tali on Citadel Station while walking up the steps between levels. 

Unlike a lot of people who'd rather use the Transit system because it's faster, I'd rather walk the streets and halls within a game because it adds to the immersion.  I miss the elevators and how I could walk anywhere on the station in ME1.

[bjdbwea]

james1976 wrote...

Unlike a lot of people who'd rather use the Transit system because it's faster, I'd rather walk the streets and halls within a game because it adds to the immersion.  I miss the elevators and how I could walk anywhere on the station in ME1.

I agree. Immersion is an important aspect, especially for an RPG.

[BiancoAngelo7]

@OP



Yes please.

[Ahglock]

For me a lot depends on what you consider RPG elements. On the Elder Scrolls board for example a lot of people want to add a fatigue cost to jogging because it is more immersive, role play etc. Sorry to me that is worthless tedium, not role play. Me crossing the street in 4 seconds instead of 6 did not break my immersion, but crossing in 6 did bore me. Useless tedium neither ups the difficulty or the immersion of the game IMO. You can go too far in the other direction as well with all movement basically being teleporting to the next location, but there are a lot of areas where it is just tedium for tedium's sake. ME1 inventory system would be an example of useless tedium IMO. Not saying no inventory is good, but carrying 100 assault rifles and sorting through and selling that crap is worthless tedium IMO. It didn't add to my immersion, it didn't make the game more challenging by adding a micro management detail, it just took time.

[ObserverStatus]

The thing that annoyed me most about ME2's rpg system was the shared cooldowns of all your abilities. It seemed like I never had the right ability up when I needed it.

[lazuli]

bobobo878 wrote...

The thing that annoyed me most about ME2's rpg system was the shared cooldowns of all your abilities. It seemed like I never had the right ability up when I needed it.

Apart from the status of ME2 squadmates in ME3, this is what I'm most curious about.  How will they handle the cooldown system?  I'm fine with the cooldowns remaining the same as they were in ME2, as that system forced me to think strategically.  But global cooldowns are not the only way to encourage strategic thinking, nor are they ideal.