206 réponses à ce sujet

[Sneelonz]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

2papercuts wrote...

they should add chainsaws

and killstreaks

Not just that. K/D ratio. I wanna know how many times I've killed a person without dying. Oh and while they're at it, can we get some perks? You know like extra life? Double tap? Marathon? 

-Polite

I know you guys are kidding... but "perks" sound pretty cool. And some of the other things aren't half as bad as you make them seem.

Modifié par Sneelonz, 31 décembre 2010 - 05:42 .

[mx3ze]

Well, i have not been disappointed with previous Mass Effect games, but a grenade luncher under a rifle could be so awesome. i like to throw hot potatoes to camping noobs in COD MW2. i'm a pro tuber since PERFECT DARK (N64) and i'd like to cook some collectors/reapers ass with an awsum 'nade luncher not like the one we had in ME2.. but anyway, whatever guns we'll have in Me3, it will be my prefered game anyway

[Jaron Oberyn]

@Angel-Shinkiro - no problem I set it up anyways. I was waitin for someone to finish it off.



-Polite

[sympathy4saren]

Does the OP know the Normandy itself is a stealth ship?

[Captain_Obvious_au]

True sympathy, but you can't go into combat as the Normandy :-p

[slimgrin]

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

True sympathy, but you can't go into combat as the Normandy :-p

You did in ME2. It was, in fact, a variable part of story if I remember correctly.

Modifié par slimgrin, 31 décembre 2010 - 04:37 .

[Element_Zero]

Humm. . . Had to ponder a response to this one. .

Ok I saw a few titles come up during this discussion, Rainbow 6 Vegas, Far Cry, etc. . . Yea I know I'm leaving out the ones that keep popping up like COD, Halo, and the like.

I have a tendency to be of the opinion that customization is more RPG element to say the least. You are after all setting up your 'costume' to role play the environment in a way you desire. (if anyone has gone to one of the IRL events they can be quite fun. . . I'm thinking of a particular event that occurs every year up in Shakopee, MN and had folks dressing up as whatever they wish from mid evil times? Anyone anyone? Has thow not heard of the Rennaissance Festival? )

To compare (for those patient enough to read though. . . )

Rainbow series has had quite a colored history and along it's development lines, it combined multiple elements FPS / TPS including strategy in the early games. (which hardcore fans loved, but these folks also hated when the Vegas series came out. Fans also dam near made some sub titles of the series nearly impossible to play since the AI had a quicker reaction time than a normal human on upper difficulty levels! Vegas streamlined it and took out the strategy part, relaxed the AI a bit by redefining their ability to detect and react.) Still the series has a very linear, and small storyline to each from what I recall (depending on the title) with the main focus being the battlefields. Missions also had varying linearity to them as well, some titles had multiple paths to goals, others didn't. But folks were dropped nearly right into the battlefield from mission to mission. GRAW is also similar in scope to my understanding. Still depending on which title these series allowed for varied customization of weapons and armor.

Far Cry, Far Cry 2, Crysis, Crysis 2 (Crytek btw. .) was a tad different, and the routes or paths on the battlefield supported more non linear or 'sandbox' solutions to players on battle fields (allowed tons of freedom in playstyle, you could go sneaky, you could go hardcore and get personal with enemies. This all centered around the AI's skill sets and arrangement of 'awareness' - 'switches or triggers'. The AI for the most part in each of these games shared there 'awareness' and were for the most part linear in their reactions. They all shared their 'search mode' reactions for the most part. And player pathing was really wide with what route you took from point A to B to finish.) In other-words while the storyline remained linear in scope while the battlefields didn't. . .

In reality it all has to do with player involvement. (is the dev team deciding what I have to wear, carry, how I have to act. . . etc) How 'involved' or 'aware' is the AI and the like is also a concern.

Now here is where I think ME comes into play. . . In ME 1 you got a lot of nonlinear elements with some linear elements. The storyline and some of the battlefields were sandboxy in nature. Players involved themselves with weapon mods, skillsets, teammates, and armor choices. Chapters within the story was non linear with their pathing (paragon - renegade) and with cut-scenes were involving with visual and audio cues too! Wandering the galaxy for the most part was non linear, and so were those drives - battles involving the Mako. . . (you could always fight or leave at anytime you wanted.) On foot, in battles concerning the main storyline it was a different story though.

*whew. . . wipes brow* Yes yes I know I probably left some things out. . . 

ME 2 streamlined some elements and reoriented others. But this is due to the way the varied mechanics that were applied, upgraded, downgraded, or scraped to the pixel wasteland! ME 2 did remove the huge rewards (in lootable gear, but put in place some attribute modifier awards for abilties or guns.) due to the inventory issues folks were having with ME 1. ME 2 did bring to the table some beautiful work in costumes for the squadmates and optional modular - rendered (with mods for player attributes!) armor for the player to use.   Freedom to access and manage inventory was cut from battlefields as well. Background pictures were still there but hidden by the foreground elements in varied degrees (and gave the feeling of a dirty, nasty, dusty  Omega or a cleaner yet busy Illium. Yet some beautiful backgrounds could be scene from time to time in the open vistas during the mainstory, or on some planet sidequests.) Skillsets - ablitlies were cut down in scope but were still adjustable and weapons different and had flavor or feel to them. AI was given a bit more flavor too. . . Mechs reacted like mechs, Bluesuns took cover when they were 'switched / triggered on', and the like as far as the AI is concerned. The Hammerhead was well. . . a step back (linear vs non linear gameplay) a bit but that (I again humbly believe,) was due to the major cutback in pathing. (Pathing = Hammerhead missions were guided to objectives by tall walls, platforms, etc. And players couldn't exit the vehicle by their choice.) These are all story elements, enviroment, backgrounds, foregrounds, characters + there varied reactions, cut-scenes, and planets. . .  and both games (ME 1 & 2) involved the player by deepening their experence in my humble opionion.

Egads. . .  lol  Thee bit to windy with thow words. . .

Anyway I do agree with the OP that customization of weapons would help the player further 'involve' themselves in the experence I will humbly call Mass Effect. Addition of silencers, or optics, and the like kinda depends on how the lore of these guns work. I agree that it would be really nice to have a swapable sight (maybe allow the old cross hairs to be swapped for a simple circle with a aiming dot (that widens like in ME 1 as the gun gets unstable,) or even the old reticule. *dreams*, all in TPS!) or laser sights. *whispers* or even minaturizing the heavy weapons into rendered working attachables . . .  Hey I like to look at that lovely armor the development team came up with! Besides that heavy . . looks HEAVY!

I also liked the disk grenades from ME 1 too. . .   *whispers* I just wish I could buy the heavy weapon ammo or grenades at a vendor from time to time . . instead of hopeing some one drops a nade or there's more than one HW box on the map. . . (it's the reason I did not use either very often, if at all. . And I've been playin on the HARD Difficulty! Doing what old Kal'Reegar calls bug biteing! ) Yea ya can take down the ME 2 boss at the end with ya vanella AR, SMG, SR, or Pistol, it just takes a bit more time!

Kudos to those who read  this long post! I'd reward ya with a cookie, but thow hast none. . . not that it matters anyway . . . ole compy would zap me or just get upset if I started stuffen them in the USP port! *kidden*!

Egads I need to get back into the ole job market. . .

Oh. . . one more thing. . . hi 5 to those who read the postings . . . . it takes a bit . . . but it can be done!

Modifié par Element_Zero, 31 décembre 2010 - 08:06 .

[TheBellTolls4Me]

Good God in heaven newbie, there are just so very many ways for me to say this to you: Never, not in a million years, absolutely not, no way josé, no chance lance, niet negatory, mhmh, nuhu, ohoh, and of course my own personal favorite of all time, man falling off of the cliff: Nooooooooooooooooooo...

[thetruefreemo]

I just want headshots to work not just have something that says that it makes them work.

[SalsaDMA]

Heavens forbid that people actually read the text of a post before they reply to it...



I guess for some people making themselves 'heard' is more important than stopping up and examining the topic they are actually responding to...

[PD ORTA]

Babli wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

Babli wrote...
This.

ME 3 desperately needs more RPG elements. And I´m not talking about dialogues and decisions.

Which part about upgrading your weapon or stealth missions is bad?

There is limited time for development of a game, especially when company is under the rEApers. I´d rather see Bioware to working more on RPG elements then shooter ones.

edit- title of thread is indeed misleading. i say yes to some stealth mission and customization of weapons.

I think that's the OP's point. Many so called RPG elements are pretty much standard in modern shooters.

[Code_R]

We already had weapon customisation in ME1, developing it and making it easier to use would have been better that cutting it altogether. It doesn't really require actual focus on shooting gameplay that the thread title suggests. Someone edit? Hopefully it returns in ME3.

[Sailears]

To be honest, I think the thread title is good - makes people at least click on it, and tests whether they have enough composure to actually read and digest the OP.

[Psearo]

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

Okay so that's a bit of a controversial statement I'm sure, but hear me out. I just went and re-played 'Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter' and rather enjoy the game...especially as an invincible SASR operator. Getting to the point though, there are so many elements in that game that I feel would translate well to ME3 and make the game better, without damaging - indeed, enhancing - the RPG elements.

Firstly, weapons. In GRAW you get a choice of a number of primary and secondary weapons. The big thing though is that you can then customise them. Let's say you choose the SCAR-L (Mk16 rifle). You can choose to replace the standard scope with a different (arguably better) one; you can add a grenade launcher or front grip for more stability in auto-fire underneath the barrel; you can add a silencer - this way, you fully customise YOUR weapon to the way you want it. You can also customise your squaddies weapons.

Secondly, stealth. I realise that ME isn't a stealth based game, but here I'm going to look at both GRAW and Rainbow Six: Vegas. In both games, particularly R6:V, you can go charging into a gunfight if you want. However, you can also sneak around, eliminating enemies without alerting the rest of them. In one level of R6:V you can sneak across a rooftop and kill about 10 enemies without alerting them to your presence. You can't do this all the time though, but it mixes up combat a bit. Plus, would this not be the perfect style of play for the Infiltrator?

These are just two FPS/Shooter elements I feel that ME4 woul dbenefit from. Not only because they would enhance the shooter aspects, but because they would enhance the RPG aspects at the same time.

Thoughts?

I'd like to add, use R6: Vegas cover system. I honestly thought that was very well done.

Weapon customisation could certainly make the different weapons  much more useful.
So far, in both games, it's been a case of updating to the next weapon because it's superior in stats. Weapon Mods in ME1 just made the better weapons, even better than they should have been -> infinite fire with high damage and zero heat problems....

In both ME games, I personally preferred the appearance of the default assault rifle over later ones.
The same with the pistols, shotguns and sniper rifles.
It would be nice to be able to use those weapons from start to finish, without actually gimping yourself. Weapon customisation like what Cpt. Obvious suggests would be a good way to do this. It worked with Dragon Age and the rune system, KoTOR and the weapon modding (simplistic by comparison, but still relevant) and I've no doubt it would work with ME3.

Also, I honestly missed being able to specialise in certain weapons by choice, and to what level of proficiency, as we had in ME1.
So combining the two without the chaffe of either game, would certainly be to our advantage.
The same could easily be applied to armour customisation for both Sheperd and companions.

[james1976]

Yeah, advancing all weapons at once (soldier) seemed silly to me. I liked it better when I could chose what type to specialize in as well.

[WowWTF]

No more RPG elements.

[Lumikki]

If we compare ME1 and ME2 shooter elements, then ME1 did has huge lack of shooter side. I mean if we really look the situation, then there wasn't so many shooter elements at all in ME1.

1. Player skill based aiming (half way)
2. Line of sight (half way)
3. Cover & ?

While ME2 added few more shooter features and fixed some half way done features, some of them are major ones.

4. "Ammunitions" as resources
5. Ability shoot different parts of enemies
6. Guns what actually feeled like the Gun

My point is that you take the players own ability aim from ME1 and replace it with select targets. There would have been absolute no real shooter features in ME1. That's why I find it funny, when people complain about RPG and shooter balance. Think about it. Most of the other features are all about supporting RPG.

As for adding more shooter elements in ME3, like more different weapons and armors, modification and customation of them to all characters. Yeah, that good starts, because that's good for both shooter and RPG. How ever, I think after ME2 it's more important to make RPG side better than make shooter side better. In ME2 we allready have good shooter side, but RPG side needs more love, but so that it doesn't destroy shooter elements.

Modifié par Lumikki, 31 décembre 2010 - 08:30 .

[Element_Zero]

Lumikki wrote...

If we compare ME1 and ME2 shooter elements, then ME1 did has huge lack of shooter side. I mean if we really look the situation, then there wasn't so many shooter elements at all in ME1.

1. Player skill based aiming (half way)
2. Line of sight (half way)
3. Cover & ?

While ME2 added few more shooter features and fixed some half way done features, some of them are major ones.

4. "Ammunitions" as resources
5. Ability shoot different parts of enemies
6. Guns what actually feeled like the Gun

My point is that you take the players own ability aim from ME1 and replace it with select targets. There would have been absolute no real shooter features in ME1. That's why I find it funny, when people complain about RPG and shooter balance. Think about it. Most of the other features are all about supporting RPG.

As for adding more shooter elements in ME3, like more different weapons and armors, modification and customation of them to all characters. Yeah, that good starts, because that's good for both shooter and RPG. How ever, I think after ME2 it's more important to make RPG side better than make shooter side better. In ME2 we allready have good shooter side, but RPG side needs more love, but so that it doesn't destroy shooter elements.

With out making another huge post. . . What I see is a 'hybird' game. . Something that Bioware has done well with.

It's sorta a Myst (graphic novel / game with puzzles) type - (eh insert whatever title) shooter hybird.

I also suspect that the development team has had some issues along the way of creating ME 2. I only say this, because some levels (and cut-scenes) seemed to have some different concepts within . . . Illuim and Zakura's Ward were done differently for example 'As you walked though Illium for example news stories - advertisements popped up at random, where as at the ward you had to click on various things to get a advertisement or the general news. . . Now maybe I'm misinterpeting it and they wanted it that way to express a certain feel to these individual levels but both areas were trading floors . . . '

What those issues were? *shrugs* One can speculate or guess but in reality only the development team knows. My guess had something to do with some rewrite done after some of the cut scenes were done, rather it involved a storyline or game mechanic issue? Who knows. The game is huge and alot of things happen (good and bad) to bring it together.

It's also why I think it's a bit . .  well for lack of a better word. . The story side felt roughly done.

From what I see here, one wonders if the story sided folks wanted it polished a bit more. . .

Modifié par Element_Zero, 31 décembre 2010 - 09:35 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Schneidend wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

those videos arent a
representation of the average gamer by any means. those are videos
created after playing ME2 atleast 357 times. practice makes perfect, and
its not hard to perfect a video game.

Then practice. I don't see why that is even an issue.

Regardless, the examples I gave aren't superhuman. They're just players who record their gameplay. If I weren't on the console version of the game, I'd probably have a video of me performing similar antics. Just watch Gatsby play Mega Man X. He makes mistakes. What those videos don't show are the countless other times these players made a mistake and Shepard was obliterated. Reloading saves just doesn't make for an interesting video.

i think your actually in agreement with me here.....

these arent just random ME2 players videos here. even you said it yourself, the videos are a colaboration of near perfection. those guys have played more of one small section in the video game then i have played all together. you cant say this video is how youll play your adept, only if youve played this level, this class, and this game, for as long as gatsby has. practice has everythiong to do with it. do you really think the average gamer is capable of doing what gatsby can do(ive never actually seen one of their videos but i can only assume they are pretty good players since you mentioned them by name)?

[The Spamming Troll]

Lumikki wrote...

If we compare ME1 and ME2 shooter elements, then ME1 did has huge lack of shooter side. I mean if we really look the situation, then there wasn't so many shooter elements at all in ME1.

1. Player skill based aiming (half way)
2. Line of sight (half way)
3. Cover & ?

While ME2 added few more shooter features and fixed some half way done features, some of them are major ones.

4. "Ammunitions" as resources
5. Ability shoot different parts of enemies
6. Guns what actually feeled like the Gun

My point is that you take the players own ability aim from ME1 and replace it with select targets. There would have been absolute no real shooter features in ME1. That's why I find it funny, when people complain about RPG and shooter balance. Think about it. Most of the other features are all about supporting RPG.

As for adding more shooter elements in ME3, like more different weapons and armors, modification and customation of them to all characters. Yeah, that good starts, because that's good for both shooter and RPG. How ever, I think after ME2 it's more important to make RPG side better than make shooter side better. In ME2 we allready have good shooter side, but RPG side needs more love, but so that it doesn't destroy shooter elements.

i completely disagree. your thoughts about ME2s features of gunplay only have to do withyour own personal opinion. ME1 actually had atributes related to each specific weapon, numerouse weapon mods, a completely unique overheating mechanic, crouching, dual zoom sniper scope.....ME2 gave us 19 guns, 3 armors, and thats it.

[Lumikki]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

i completely disagree. your thoughts about ME2s features of gunplay only have to do withyour own personal opinion. ME1 actually had atributes related to each specific weapon, numerouse weapon mods, a completely unique overheating mechanic, crouching, dual zoom sniper scope.....ME2 gave us 19 guns, 3 armors, and thats it.

It's fine to disagree. How ever, I was not talking combat elements in general, I was talking shooter elements. You knows those stuff what seperates shooter side combat from other combats, like RPG combat.

[sinosleep]

slimgrin wrote...

Thats like saying the Japanese Street Fighter champ, Diago Umehara, can pretty much mop the floor with anyone, so why can't I? After all it's hypothetically possible. 

Besides, your 'variety' is contingent on me playing Vanguard. And let me say again, die-hard shooter fans and critics alike repeatedly said ME2's shooter elements were it's weak point. I'm not alone in this. I don't, however, think it needs more shooter elements per se; it needs better ones.

I don't really think I'm all that much "above average" to be honest. I started making vids to disprove the myths that a) vanguards sucked as a class  shotguns sucked as a weapons class c) insanity was impossible for *insert class here* 

I've never held myself up as some kind of superhuman player and have always encouraged others to post videos, and they have, many of which match or even exceed the skill shown in my own videos which tells me that what I do isn't all that hard to replicate.

With regards to variety, I roll with sentinels and engineers as well.

And when it comes to reviews, I'd like to read the reviews you're talking about. Cause I'm sitting here looking at PC reviews from metacritic and Within the first batch I see no less than 10 mentions of ME 2 becoming a much better shooter and even outright being reffered to as one.

[EDIT HERE] Some how forgot this in the original post.....

Kronner rolls with infiltrators and MrBozorgmehr does it with adepts 

Point being, every class in the game can be used aggressively without an overt reliance on cover.

Modifié par sinosleep, 01 janvier 2011 - 02:34 .

[Jaron Oberyn]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

If we compare ME1 and ME2 shooter elements, then ME1 did has huge lack of shooter side. I mean if we really look the situation, then there wasn't so many shooter elements at all in ME1.

1. Player skill based aiming (half way)
2. Line of sight (half way)
3. Cover & ?

While ME2 added few more shooter features and fixed some half way done features, some of them are major ones.

4. "Ammunitions" as resources
5. Ability shoot different parts of enemies
6. Guns what actually feeled like the Gun

My point is that you take the players own ability aim from ME1 and replace it with select targets. There would have been absolute no real shooter features in ME1. That's why I find it funny, when people complain about RPG and shooter balance. Think about it. Most of the other features are all about supporting RPG.

As for adding more shooter elements in ME3, like more different weapons and armors, modification and customation of them to all characters. Yeah, that good starts, because that's good for both shooter and RPG. How ever, I think after ME2 it's more important to make RPG side better than make shooter side better. In ME2 we allready have good shooter side, but RPG side needs more love, but so that it doesn't destroy shooter elements.

i completely disagree. your thoughts about ME2s features of gunplay only have to do withyour own personal opinion. ME1 actually had atributes related to each specific weapon, numerouse weapon mods, a completely unique overheating mechanic, crouching, dual zoom sniper scope.....ME2 gave us 19 guns, 3 armors, and thats it.

I agree with Spamming Troll. ME1's shooter elements were better because they tied in with RPG elements. I even preferred the ME1 combat to ME2's. In ME2 it's too much pew pew. They can't even hold a gun properly. The animations reminded me so much of UT3's gun animations. Just look at shepard or a squaddie when they're holding an SMG or a pistol, and look at the videos of UT3 with npc's holding a pistol. ME1's combat animations were better. 

-Polite

[Mecha Tengu]

MyryaSzataria wrote...

On-Subject. No. Not only no, but HELL NO. This is an RPG, not an FPS. If you wanna play an FPS, go play something else, don't con the devs into ruining the game. They've already fallen for people's whining for multiplayer, in a game where the very idea of Multiplayer doesn't fit, at all. An RPG is centered around you. One person. Singular. Numero uno. So how exactly are they going to fit in multiplayer, which is a lot of people and usually endless spawns on both sides till match end, into the game without completely breaking it. Same for Co-Op. Gee, now I can play with a buddy! Wonderful, but who's he or she going to play? One of your followers? Or a secondary Shepard? Entire bit is BS. I dumped 5 years of my life into an MMO, one Chris Priestly previously worked on,. and I watched as whiners and screamers convinced the Devs to destroy the game. Profession after profession destroyed because someone lost in PVP one too many times, meanwhile, the game was broken. More bugs than an anthill and Priestly telling everyone it was all okay, trust him, he'd fix it or it wasn't broken, it was supposed to not work. 2 "Fixes" later 75% of the game population left, and more continued to leave by the month. I do not want to see whiny snots trying to convert an RPG into an FPS succeed because people like him have no spine and want to go after the FPS demographic, even though this game is aimed somewhere else. So, politely, bug off.

Mass Effect

IS

A

THIRD 

PERSON

SHOOTER



apparently everyone hates First Person Shooters because they are "too flashy" and "compromise actual gameplay", but no one honestly has any idea what they are talking about, and are just trying too hard to be part of the non conformist elite

Modifié par Mecha Tengu, 01 janvier 2011 - 03:15 .

[Whereto]

The Spamming Troll wrote...
i completely disagree. your thoughts about ME2s features of gunplay only have to do withyour own personal opinion. ME1 actually had atributes related to each specific weapon, numerouse weapon mods, a completely unique overheating mechanic, crouching, dual zoom sniper scope.....ME2 gave us 19 guns, 3 armors, and thats it.

Yes ME1 had more guns and options with what to do with them, but there was no difference between them. Sure going from the base level assault rifle to the top of the line specter gear there is a huge difference, though everything in between has barely any difference to the one above all below. I prefer how mass effect 2 handles it gun where they have a really good, different feel to each. If they did as the op suggested there will be even more guns(hopefully) but further more each gun will have a lot of different feels and a lot more mod's that make a noticable difference