262 réponses à ce sujet

[sinosleep]

tonnactus wrote...

So the geth shotgun is overpowered then...

Duh? For crying out loud even devs have said as much.

[femio18]

mcneil_1 wrote...

To a number of people I have spoken at the local gaming store they say the ME2 should have been called Mass Gears of War Effect 2 (I know its lame but thats what they called it).
Their biggest gripe was that who ever streamlined ME2 took out a big chunk of the good stuff from ME1 (mainly 2/3 of the stats and skills), adding heatsinks (ammo) to guns and nuking the inventory big time (it just needed tweaking).

no but EA wants a shooter game

[Jaron Oberyn]

Bigdoser wrote...

Here we go again can't we just forget about labels and enjoy a game? Is that so hard? Also how can you say that there is no rpg elements in mass effect 2? There was leveling up, buying new upgrdes etc and learning new skills. Meh I don't really care for labels if they game is fun just play it and if you want something to be added put it up on the boards but you don't need to get into a whole debate about what is an rpg or is mass effect a shooter. People these days just need to learn on how to enjoy their dam game.

So Bioware says that the game is the player's personal universe, you're supposed to control Shepard since he's your character and you choose everything he does/says - yet most of the dialogue in ME2 is automatic. And the dialogue that you do get to choose usually has the same line for every response. Not to mention, there are some conversations (Talking to miranda or the normandy for example) that only allow 1 response to progress the dialogue. So how does that equate to choice? To making decisions? They're basically defining the character for you instead of letting the player do it like in ME1. In ME1 there were some instances where all responses lead to the same line, but it was extremely rare. There was automatic dialogue once, and that was when you were landing on virmire. In ME2 it's so frequent that it ruins the immersion because it takes the player out of control. It's like playing a shooter since all other rpg elements have been stripped down and shooter dialogue isn't controlled.  Replay LoTSB and pay attention to the dialogue. Not only the automatic responses, but the same exact lines for the optional responses. This is why I said earlier that ME2 wasn't an RPG. It's really more of a shooter, thanks to Norman, with some RPG elements sprinkled here and there. From someone who used to be a hardcore Bioware fan, I'm beginning to lose faith in not only Mass Effect, but their future games. And I'm not the only one who holds this opinion.

-Polite

[sympathy4saren]

Like I said before...it would be irony if Halo or CoD put a slew of rpg elements into mandatory gameplay. When their fans are upset, we can tell them...."its still a first person shooter. Stop complaining."

[Bigdoser]

FF13 was a dissapointment to me the last ff that i really enjoyed was 9 anyway thats not the point. Also mass effect is an action rpg and it suprises me that people still try to say its just a shooter.

[Jaron Oberyn]

sympathy4saren wrote...

Like I said before...it would be irony if Halo or CoD put a slew of rpg elements into mandatory gameplay. When their fans are upset, we can tell them...."its still a first person shooter. Stop complaining."

Oh I'd like that. Give them a taste of their own medicine. 

-Polite

[Pyrate_d]

The RPG elements should be primarily in dialogue and important decisions. This is what ME2 did, and it was a good change.



Sorting through 150 similarly named, similar looking items was incredibly bad. I actually liked the upgrades in ME1, although they could be simplified to remove the stupid numbering and just make one of each type.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Bigdoser wrote...

FF13 was a dissapointment to me the last ff that i really enjoyed was 9 anyway thats not the point. Also mass effect is an action rpg and it suprises me that people still try to say its just a shooter.

Mass Effect 1 was an "Action RPG" according to Bioware. But ME2 is a "Shooter RPG". Apparently they spent 81 days working on shooter mechanics and threw out all of the RPG elements of the game. 

http://www.gamesrada...051114473989090

-Polite

Modifié par PoliteAssasin, 27 décembre 2010 - 07:35 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

Pyrate_d wrote...

The RPG elements should be primarily in dialogue and important decisions. This is what ME2 did, and it was a good change.

Sorting through 150 similarly named, similar looking items was incredibly bad. I actually liked the upgrades in ME1, although they could be simplified to remove the stupid numbering and just make one of each type.

My issue isn't the inventory, but how they handled the dialogue in the second game. You had little to no choice in it.

-Polite

[sympathy4saren]

Haha I wasn't saying that to provoke, but to give an alternative perspective...the polar opposite perspective, of how some of the rpg fans feel. Know what I mean?



I don't think there is pointless, mindless complaining. We simply are saying....hey BioWare, don't forget about us...your core fanbase.

[Pyrate_d]

Maybe we played a different game, PoliteAssassin. In my game, there were a lot of choices. Certainly there were many more outcomes than ME1

[shnizzler93]

Mass Effect 2 was the better game. Mass Effect (1) was the better experience.

[sympathy4saren]

A lot of people like getting the same item. It has value. You can either stock up, sell for credits (and become rich) or get more media gel. The turn to media-gel option was a legitimate alternative for those who didn't like it. Instead of going to a station and simply grabbing medi-gel like in two, there were options.



Options, options, options.

[sympathy4saren]

I don't accept the argument that Mass Effect 2 had more outcomes. If you transferred a save file from the original, your entire story is founded upon the option branch you chose at the end of Mass Effect. Sure, the suicide mission outcome was impressive, but so was your ability to alter and choose the fate of the entire galaxy's political structure.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Pyrate_d wrote...

Maybe we played a different game, PoliteAssassin. In my game, there were a lot of choices. Certainly there were many more outcomes than ME1

Well then you need to go play the game again and pay close attention to the dialogue. Automatic, and when you think you're making a choice. 


-Polite

[tonnactus]

sympathy4saren wrote...

Like I said before...it would be irony if Halo or CoD put a slew of rpg elements into mandatory gameplay. When their fans are upset, we can tell them...."its still a first person shooter. Stop complaining."

Well,exactly this happened with Gears of War 3 which will have light rpg elements.Ironic,isnt it?

[JalenTigh]

I defiantly want to see armor choices and weapons choices put back in the game. I liked that part of ME1, heck, I even liked all the skills... ME2 just felt way to dumbed down.. I do however think ME1 went a way overboard on loot... Walking out of a simple UNC planet mission with enough equipment and weapons to outfit your entire squad. and have enough left over to break the bank at any vendor took some of the fun out the customization they offered. It was just to easy to keep your entire squad in top of the line gear. I was really bummed though about how they just got rid of all of it in ME2,, I hope its back in ME3, but would be happy if they could just meet somewhere in the middle.

Modifié par JalenTigh, 27 décembre 2010 - 08:16 .

[femio18]

sympathy4saren wrote...

Haha I wasn't saying that to provoke, but to give an alternative perspective...the polar opposite perspective, of how some of the rpg fans feel. Know what I mean?

I don't think there is pointless, mindless complaining. We simply are saying....hey BioWare, don't forget about us...your core fanbase.

you mean your real fans

[Kronner]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

My issue isn't the inventory, but how they handled the dialogue in the second game. You had little to no choice in it.

-Polite

Must have been playing a different game then.

[Balek-Vriege]

I think a lot of people are confusing roleplaying elements with inventory and customization systems which normally come with traditional RPGs. Personally I like to see this type of stuff, but I know full well that RPGs are about story, choice, dialogue and character development, not loot aquisition and management (MMORPGs are for that).

I would not like to see a return to ME1 inventory systems. ME2's inventory system was fine (and realistic for the setting), but it just needed some polish and added features. A few features I would like to see added:

Weapon visuals/parts customization: A weapon customization feature similar to ME2 armour customization involving special parts for each weapon. You buy/find parts which can be added to specific pistols, sniper rifles etc., changing the weapon's look slightly. Also being able to customize the colours and tints of weapons would be cool as well.

Armour Customization: More of it, especially in the pattern variety department. DLC amours should have a toggle on/off switch for helmets.

More plot integrated Assignments w/ important rewards: The ME series gets an A+ for Missions and main plot development. However, ME1 assignments felt too out of the way and had very little variety. While ME2 fixed the blandness of ME1 assignments, they still lacked depth when it came to the storyline. I think it will be more important than ever that assignments feel important in ME3. Shepard shouldn't go out of his way battling the Reapers to pick up some cash at a pirate installation for example. The pirates should be holding ancient prothean technology, blocking some relay important to the war effort or holding some important scientist hostage with valuable research. In other words, assignments should be epic this time around with unique plot/item rewards and research.

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 27 décembre 2010 - 08:43 .

[Computron2000]

tonnactus wrote...
First,the locust is far better then the avenger and the geth pulse rifle(regarding both:damage and accuracy),and equal with the vindicator.And ,of course,you could "snipe" with heavy pistols.

Remind me again, where do you get the locust SMG? Must be in the base game right?

Vindicator damage 36.8, fire rate 900 and recoil of 0.2x,0,2y
Locust damage 25, fire rate 550 and recoil 0.8x, 0.8y.

The Vindicator is better at both by a large amount.
Avenger has 10.8 damage, fire rate of 850 and recoil 1x,1y and you start with it after the tutorial. Better fire rate and close recoil. Not bad for the basic weapon vs one you have to pay for DLC to get

Lets do a closer comparison on the upgraded weapon in the base game
Tempest 14 damage, 2.1x, 2.1y recoil. Great rate of fire at 925
vs the Vindicator, near total loss. Only gets a 25 point better rate of fire.

Simple fact. Straight from the game's weapon stats

tonnactus wrote...
Not weapons let the soldier deal heavy damage.Its only adrenaline rush that increases damage with any weapon by 100 percent at level one and the ammo powers.(at least early in the game)

Using your logic, if someone pays me a salary of 1000 and you a salary of 500 and we both get a annual bonus of 10% of the base pay, the difference in our pay must be due to the bonus.

As you mentioned, adrenaline rush increases the damage. The difference in damage due to weaponry is already there. If Garrus for example upgraded purely for himself rather than a team boost, well, adrenaline rush is powerful but ammo mods aren't too shoddy either.

tonnactus wrote...
The squad is weak in offense and defense.( and for some unknown reason ,shepardt got shield upgrades his members dont get)
And there are better ways to make insanity challenging then gimping the squad and their roles and make shepardt basicly do all the damage alone even when playing a class that is more meant to be a support class.

Eh it was never to cater to insanity. The decision was to make Shepard the "goddamn hero, a living icon", not play second fiddle or have to hide behind Grunt for survival.

Oh yeah still waiting for your answer on whether Bioware should listen to me or you

Modifié par Computron2000, 27 décembre 2010 - 08:55 .

[sinosleep]

tonnactus wrote...

Well,exactly this happened with Gears of War 3 which will have light rpg elements.Ironic,isnt it?

This would only be ironic if both companies were using elements from other genres in an effort to differentiate themselves from other games on the market but were actually becoming more similar in the process. Since what both are actually trying to do is draw in fans from other genres there's nothing "ironic" about it.

[Cyberfrog81]

Gameplay wise, ME1 wanted to be this great shooter-RPG hybrid, but that didn't work out too well. The game certainly had its strengths (most notably the richness of the game universe and the top notch story), but neither the shooter- nor the RPG systems were all that impressive.

Now fast forward to ME2. Is the shooter part more satisfying? Heck yes. Are the RPG systems too simple? Arguably yes. Solution: Give the RPG part of the package more love, ideally the same amount of designer love that the shooting got.

Going back to ME1 gameplay, however, is not the solution and I'm also 100% certain that that's not what they are doing.

[shnizzler93]

Cyberfrog81 wrote...

Gameplay wise, ME1 wanted to be this great shooter-RPG hybrid, but that didn't work out too well. The game certainly had its strengths (most notably the richness of the game universe and the top notch story)

Now fast forward to ME2. Is the shooter part more satisfying? Heck yes. Are the RPG systems too simple? Arguably yes. Solution: Give the RPG part of the package more love, ideally the same amount of designer love that the shooting got.

+1

[sinosleep]

Cyberfrog81 wrote...

Gameplay wise, ME1 wanted to be this great shooter-RPG hybrid, but that didn't work out too well. The game certainly had its strengths (most notably the richness of the game universe and the top notch story), but neither the shooter- nor the RPG systems were all that impressive.

Now fast forward to ME2. Is the shooter part more satisfying? Heck yes. Are the RPG systems too simple? Arguably yes. Solution: Give the RPG part of the package more love, ideally the same amount of designer love that the shooting got.

Going back to ME1 gameplay, however, is not the solution and I'm also 100% certain that that's not what they are doing.

And you would be correct on both counts.

What was prominantly displayed at the end of the "evil" Christina Norman's "where did my inventory go" presentation? 

Richer RPG features for ME 3.

What have Casey Hudson and Christina Norman continually said in interviews? 

Both that they want richer RPG features for ME 3, as well not having any regrets with regards to changes made to the various interfaces or the combat mechanics.

What would common sense dictate after reading and hearing these things for months and months and months now? 

The vast majority of conceptual changes made in ME 2 will be around for ME 3, they will simply be EXPANDED upon in order to provide a richer RPG experience.

Nothing they've said at any point in development should lead one to believe that anything from ME 1 will be coming back to ME 3 wholesale when changing those aspects of the game at the conceptual level was PRECISELY the mission statement when creating ME 2.

They reached that mission statement, they aren't going to tear it down in the sequel.

Modifié par sinosleep, 27 décembre 2010 - 09:24 .