206 réponses à ce sujet

[sinosleep]

Like most things related to ME 1, the actual number of weapons and armor are grossly exaggerated. It had 4 weapons (spectre gear), and 2 sets of armor (spectre gear, colossus).The MODS I'll give credit for, although even those are very much exaggerated as well. Most people roll with a very limited number of ammo or armor mods they throw on EVERYBODY.

Frankly I'd rather have 19 distinct weapons than 4 reskinned models that are only "different" by virtue of doing more damage.

Modifié par sinosleep, 01 janvier 2011 - 03:33 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Whereto wrote...

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

the thing is, what wasnt wrong, shouldnt have been fixed. ME1 weapons functioned awesomely. they made combat feel unique, and that in itself is a reason to embrace the weapons of old. the one and only problem ME1 weapons didnt give us was variety. ME2 changed the way weapons funtioned, the effectiveness of abilities, and removed crouching and added planet scaning! i think its funny when the flashyness of ME2s combat can so easily mask its flaws, specially considering the fact that they based ME2 off one of the single greatest games ive ever played, and changed it. .....for absolutley no reason at all. why cant ME2 weapons have continued the overheating functionality of their predesecors?  i recently played ME1, and not looking for ammo clips never felt better. ....so did crouching!

i have a really bad feeling ME3 is going to look alot more like ME2 then ME1.

[Whereto]

ME1's combat was unique all right, it took no tactics what so ever to play late game. If you were solider, you could equip a assault rifle that would never overheat. Even mid game, if you played it right you don't even need to take cover on some levels. All in all, mass effect's combat was nothing special and took no tactics as you could roam around in invincible heavy armour with a gun thats never over heats. Sure thats unique, but takes no tactics or skills(late game especially)



This brings me to what sinosleep commented on. Mass Effects gun variety was lacking, exactly like its armour selection. Sure if anyone is happy with the same armour being reskined and given a couple extra points with a new name, then be my guest to say me1 had variety. This is like borderlands and its apparent million gun variants, which was in actual fact just 6 guns with numerous attatchments



Finally this is directed to spamming troll. Ive got no problem with you liking me1's combat system better than me2 , but for me and i think you'll find, most of the community agree with me when i say me2 improved on me1's combat. Like i said earlier, blasting off at an enemy with no care in the world is cool, but not having to watch anything besides a heat meter which recovers quick, is very boring. I can agree with you the way abilities are managed in me2 isnt as good as me1 but thats a different story, considering NEARLY everything else me2 did was much better than how me1 did it(combat wise). Sure there is a lot of room for improvement in me2 but if they go back to me1 i will shoot my self with the same reskinned gun i got back on eden prime

[Captain_Obvious_au]

Another shooter addition I forgot, which would be nice for ME - picking up the gun of a dead enemy. In GRAW2 you can kill an enemy, and then pick up their weapon and use that. However this means that you drop the weapon you're currenly using. Perhaps this would be a better system than ME2 with its abundance of weapons lockers?

[Lumikki]

I don't think picking up the gun from enemy is good idea, because it could lead junk item inventory systems. Unless you just switch weapon with enemy and not pick it up as extra weapons. Basicly picking clips is it, you don't pick new weapon, it's just ammos.

As for @The Spamming Troll.

I have no problem you liking more ME1 like combat. ME1 combat is hybrid of shooter and RPG combat. Meaning character skills are affecting to players ability shoot. Also ME1 combat has gear based RPG like development, meaning rat to God complex. Like in the beging you combat is weak and later you are God like. In simple way sayed, all RPG like combat feature, but without selecting the targets, before shooting. So you basicly say, you like RPG combat system better than shooter. I have no problems with it.

How ever, my point was that ME1's combat system isn't really good shooter combat system. I did not say combat is bad, because even my opinion it's mediocre. What I really mean was about how much combat was shooter like. Because ME1 doesn't have many shooter combat based elements. This was about balance of hybrid game. Example if there is 50% combat in both games. Then ME1 had 25% shooter elements, because half the combat system was still RPG combat. While ME2 actually had 50% shooter elements, because the combat system is fully shooter like.

As for picking clips from ground, yeah it's not really that fun, but it's part of shooter combat. Because it creates better illusion of player having clips as limited amouth of ammos. Shooter combat most the time has clips as ammos, because it improves realism as feeling of limited ammos. RPG combat most the time doesn't have seperated ammos, because RPG combat doesn't try for realism. RPG combat tryes more to tactical side of combat as choose you actions carefully.

I my self liked ME2 combat more, because it feeled better. Weapons just feeled like guns, different and usefull from level 1 to 30. You could shoot different parts of enemies and it had different effects. Hole combat had more modern warfare feel. But that just my opinion.

Modifié par Lumikki, 01 janvier 2011 - 12:55 .

[sinosleep]

I get what you're saying Lumikki. To you it's not about which one is better, it's about which one behaves more like a shooter, something which frankly ME 1 practically didn't do at all.



I've always considered ME 1 to be an RPG with guns since practically every mechanic that has to do with them comes entirely from an RPG perspective. Sure, there are guns in the game, and you manually place the reticle on your target (and even that can be done from a paused screen which essentially swings it right back around into being an rpg mechanic) but everything else once you get past that is squarely in the RPG camp. Your hits and misses are stat based, your weapons have infinite ammo, you get them from looting corpses, there is no location based damage, the list goes on and on and on.



The combat in ME 1 has far more in common with KOTOR than it does with Gears.

[Lumikki]

sinosleep wrote...

I get what you're saying Lumikki. To you it's not about which one is better, it's about which one behaves more like a shooter, something which frankly ME 1 practically didn't do at all.

Yes. Point was show how little ME1 actually had shooter side.

If we go opinions what was better in my opinion, then. I don't care so much is combat shooter or RPG, but in this Mass Effect serie case, I think shooter in ME2 was better than ME1's combat system. It just feeled better, weapon combat worked better. Mostly because in cinematic action based long range gameplay, shooter does it better. That's my opinion.

Shooter system is usually better for long range and faster combat situations. Because in RPG you end easyly with gear based system, stand next to enemy kind of situation, what is more close combat system. It's hard to find really good long range combat system in RPG combat systems. RPG combat is really good in tactical combat where game can wait for players do deside what action to make. Shooter is better in faster action like long range combat.

Good example is DAO, where player can just pause the game and deside what to do. That's where RPG is in best. How ever, that's really bad for cinematic movie like impression, if game keep stoping all the time. So, while in DAO the RPG fits well, in Mass Effect shooter fits better.

Modifié par Lumikki, 01 janvier 2011 - 02:37 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Whereto wrote...

ME1's combat was unique all right, it took no tactics what so ever to play late game. If you were solider, you could equip a assault rifle that would never overheat. Even mid game, if you played it right you don't even need to take cover on some levels. All in all, mass effect's combat was nothing special and took no tactics as you could roam around in invincible heavy armour with a gun thats never over heats. Sure thats unique, but takes no tactics or skills(late game especially)

This brings me to what sinosleep commented on. Mass Effects gun variety was lacking, exactly like its armour selection. Sure if anyone is happy with the same armour being reskined and given a couple extra points with a new name, then be my guest to say me1 had variety. This is like borderlands and its apparent million gun variants, which was in actual fact just 6 guns with numerous attatchments

Finally this is directed to spamming troll. Ive got no problem with you liking me1's combat system better than me2 , but for me and i think you'll find, most of the community agree with me when i say me2 improved on me1's combat. Like i said earlier, blasting off at an enemy with no care in the world is cool, but not having to watch anything besides a heat meter which recovers quick, is very boring. I can agree with you the way abilities are managed in me2 isnt as good as me1 but thats a different story, considering NEARLY everything else me2 did was much better than how me1 did it(combat wise). Sure there is a lot of room for improvement in me2 but if they go back to me1 i will shoot my self with the same reskinned gun i got back on eden prime

do you think bioware will make ME3 with all of ME1s poorly implemented features? is ME3 going to consist of planet scanning, reskinned weapons, and climbing 90 degree mountin cliffs in the mako? you dont think bioware could or should have just made ME2 with overheating weapons, universal cooldowns, and the mako?

your forgetting the superiority of your level 60 ME1 shepard compared to ME2s level 30 shepard. dual scram, dual med exos, savant amps, spectre weapons and so on, those are the things that made your shepard a wrecking ball of destruction. not the poor shooter aspects your claiming. while an ME2  level 8 sheaprd isnt much different then a level 30. the only thing that changes when leveling an ME2 character is the random encounters with weapons laying on random countertops. meaning your better later, because you finally found an SMG laying on a dead geth on some random planet. if only i was an elite soldier funded by an elite corporation, surrounded by weapons, then maybe i could actually get a weapons that isnt the predetator and the shiruken for half the game! (sorry that really grinds my gears.)

ive never understood this argument about "my guns never overheating" being complaint you can use againt ME1s weapons system. your guns never overheated becasue you modded them that way. and in now way whatsoever did that mean your gun was some kind of super gun. your perma trigger weapon was no where near hte effectiveness of my dual ail extension 7s and shredder/tungsten ammo weapon. it was nobodys choice but your own to fire forever. while it was mine to fire harder........so whats your point?

im not here saying ME2s combat is subpar. ME2 is an awesome game. the thing  that i see is that ME1 was a better game, and ME2 subtracted numerouse things that made mass effect, mass effect. which only makes me doubt ME3s somehwat return to RPGism.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 01 janvier 2011 - 07:35 .

[slimgrin]

ME1's combat laid the groundwork for an original combat system. It was rough around the edges, yes, but it was indeed unique. So then Bioware got out the hacksaw and removed any vestige of it so they could ape Gears of War.

It makes no sense.

Modifié par slimgrin, 01 janvier 2011 - 07:45 .

[DustArma]

ME1 wasn't unique in terms of gunplay, overheating weapons have been done earlier on FPS games, the Sten, Venom and MG-42 on the Wolfenstein series had both heat and ammo you had to watch for, practically every turret emplacement on most FPS games overheats if you shoot indiscriminately, the Half-Life hivehand worked exactly like Mass Effect weapons except that it used regenerating ammo instead of heat cooldowns.

[The Spamming Troll]

i consider the overheating aspect unique. i think it was extemely important to why i apreciated ME1 so much more then ME2. just becasue its been done before doesnt mean its not unique. ME2s ammo system has most definately been done before, and the change to it makes no sense. the first time i fired a weapon in ME2 i felt my first dissapointment ME2 gave me. slowly ive found more and more. honestly, im starting to think id rather have a remake of ME1 then ME3.



ive noticed ive been asking myself alot lately, am i still playing the same game here?

[NYG1991]

Like the idea of weapon customization. Stealth could be cool if implemented properly. Stealth can be buggy and annoying sometimes

[sinosleep]

slimgrin wrote...

ME1's combat laid the groundwork for an original combat system. It was rough around the edges, yes, but it was indeed unique. So then Bioware got out the hacksaw and removed any vestige of it so they could ape Gears of War.

It makes no sense.

It makes COMPLETE sense when the devs weren't satisfied with what they did in the first place and when they got a lot of feedback letting them know a lot of players weren't satisfied with it either. It makes COMPLETE sense when said devs acknowledge that they don't exactly pump out shooters every other year and so it might be prudent to look at devs that do and see what works for them.

Gears of War is a GREAT 3PS, aping it isn't a bad thing. Particularly not when you are only aping it for one aspect of your game while doing everything else in your own way.

[edit here] And all this nonsense about being unique? NO GAME in wholly unique any more. Hell Gears of War wasn't wholly unique, there had been plenty of cover shooters before it. Friggen WinBack on the N64 came out in 1999 for crying out loud. What Gears is praised for isn't originality, it's taking a LOT of things that had been around before, and melding them together better than anyone had before them. Trust me, you name a game and I'll name one that it was heavily influenced by in some way shape or form. Originality is over designated, overrated, and over sought.

Modifié par sinosleep, 02 janvier 2011 - 02:16 .

[Captain_Obvious_au]

NYG1991 wrote...

Like the idea of weapon customization. Stealth could be cool if implemented properly. Stealth can be buggy and annoying sometimes

True, but it can also be a lot of fun. Like the example I used with R6:V, it gives me quite the feeling of satisfaction that without any 'stealth' technology etc, I'm able to kill the enemy with impunity.

TES: Oblivion is a semi-good example of optional stealth gameplay too. Personally (in that game) I always run around with stealth enabled. It seems more special-forces-y plus I'm not a huge fan of the alternative fighting style. Having said that, it got to a point where I was in a small cave facing four heavily armed mercenaries. I was standing in deep shadow, with chamaeleon (sp?) enhanced armour, using my bow and arrow.

I'd use it to kill one merc, then the other three would run around, trying to get me, but couldn't see me. I killed them all in this fashion - standing quite close to them, but essentially being invisible.

[xares23x]

kill_switch_423 wrote...

 just asking for more weapon customization and some stealth elements, which would indeed be great for Infiltrator. people are so quick to jump to the hate over this stuff :/

took the word right out of my mouth
 
these arnt even that much of shooter element as just  good gameing elements having more options is always good thing

Modifié par xares23x, 04 janvier 2011 - 07:55 .

[hong]

I can see it now: Shepard, Wrex and Grunt sneaking up on an unsuspecting geth colossus.

[Pacifien]

hong wrote...
I can see it now: Shepard, Wrex and Grunt sneaking up on an unsuspecting geth colossus.

Trust me, the colossus never knew what hit him.

[Ponchoe]

I wouldn't mind customization as long as it doesn't involve enormous amounts of clutter in the inventory. Personally, I don't think sifting through 89 different items is the ideal "RPG situation", especially when I end up selling 78 of the pieces.

[Felfenix]

I like how the dumb sheep react hysterically and negatively to the OP's suggestion, as if adding those things would somehow take away from or exclude the RPG of this game. If anything, they would add to the RPG side.

Having multiple ways to complete objectives, such as sneaking around to reduce casualties or just... maybe RP a smart Shepard? Having a CHOICE in how you complete some missions, instead of just ALWAYS charging in guns blazing? How can you people object to such a thing?

Her only suggestion other than that was... adding weapon mods? Isn't that what most of you ask for daily? Wow, seriously, I've never seen so many people who would cut off their nose to spite their face.

Modifié par Felfenix, 04 janvier 2011 - 09:23 .

[SalsaDMA]

Pacifien wrote...

hong wrote...
I can see it now: Shepard, Wrex and Grunt sneaking up on an unsuspecting geth colossus.

Trust me, the colossus never knew what hit him.

That was actually a pretty cool video.

Add 2 team-mates that had snuck up with him, and it would have been over far faster even

[Captain_Obvious_au]

Felfenix wrote...

Having multiple ways to complete objectives, such as sneaking around to reduce casualties or just... maybe RP a smart Shepard? Having a CHOICE in how you complete some missions, instead of just ALWAYS charging in guns blazing? How can you people object to such a thing?

Her only suggestion other than that was... adding weapon mods? Isn't that what most of you ask for daily? Wow, seriously, I've never seen so many people who would cut off their nose to spite their face.

Pretty much the idea here. Many shooters will give you those options, but they aren't present in the ME universe. About the only one that even comes close would be Legion's loyalty mission.

Oh and for future reference I'm a he, not a she

[Element_Zero]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Pacifien wrote...

hong wrote...
I can see it now: Shepard, Wrex and Grunt sneaking up on an unsuspecting geth colossus.

Trust me, the colossus never knew what hit him.

That was actually a pretty cool video.

Add 2 team-mates that had snuck up with him, and it would have been over far faster even

While true SalsaDMA. . . You would have complainers say that this would be too powerful. Folks have been critizing the Sential class off and on as being to easy to play. . Which to me is kinda sad. In my opinion each class should have a different flavors to them and not be cookie cutouts of each other. To me this helps mulitple playthoughs for those seeking challenge or for those just seeking the story and don't want the challenge. Something folks forget; the game gets easier after your first play though. You tend to remember where this or that is, number of  enemies who spawn, and remember where the ammo for that heavy is.

On your first playthough with any of the shooter games you tend to burn up more ammo than you will on later ones. (this is due to getting familar to the 'controls' on the game and getting your timing right as well.)

Each class requires a bit different timeing (in how you use your skills - guns) and tactics in order to be effective in bringing stuff down. Add in the choices on your squad also effect your timing and tactics.

Someone from the industry gave me some staticistics a while back on Shooters and it went something like this (I don't remember exactly the breakdown in percentages - statistics. So don't quote these.) Typically average skill players will score between 20 - 40% hits on intended targets. (This means that only 20 to 40 bullets out of 100 fired actually hit the intended target.) AI within the games scores 90%? and higher depending on what mechanics they have. This person also said these statistics tend to be lower if the player is new to the game, their age, rather they are familar with the controller being used, range between the intended target / player, and if the target is or is not in motion as the shot is taken. The hit % improves for hard core players (basically folks who play more than 1-2? hours daily) who are used to the interface (controls), the introduction of aim assistance (aimbotting), or players that constantly wait for the AI to get really close before taking their shots.

Modifié par Element_Zero, 05 janvier 2011 - 07:41 .

[Stupidus]

ME1 had more shooting gametime than ME2, and its combat was a lot more complex and satisfying, not saying ME2's was bad at all. I'd just like more immersive combat if able.

[IceSavage]

For weapons customization Bioware should look at how they did customization of Lightsabers in KotOR1. The system that Alpha Protocol uses isnt bad either. ME1 had specific stats of weapons and that needs to return. Right now there is mainly weapon 1, 2, or 3. And there is 1 static upgrade path. Special named weapons like Dragon Age has is also a good idea, together with generic weapons.



Armor customization should also return in some form for all characters.



The upgrade system of the 10%+ to this skill, should be scarped. It is more fun finding a new item then getting an upgrade.



Fabrication rights system would be cool, maybe even a mini crafting system so that we use the mineral resources that we find. Example, you need 20k of this resource to produce the new gun plan you just found/bought. In order to give your companion one as well, you need 40k.



Stealth is a difficult thing for a group game. Stealth games are usually solo games or solo play while stealth is the biggest part. I also don't want a stealth system like Fallout 3/Vegas, where you just crouch and you are in stealth. That is just boring. Active guard avoidance with companions would be a nightmare.



I do think that levels should not be as linear as they are now. It would be interesting if some levels at least had multiple paths to the same objective. IE there was a choice of going left or right in a level. Consider the Geth Colossus Boss fight with its multiple paths as an idea. Sniper path to the right, quick and dirty path up the middle and the cover path up the left.

[uzivatel]

I was about to comment, but then I realized OP was probably playing the (arguably inferior) PC version.

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

EDIT: another shooter addition I forgot, which would be nice for ME - picking up the gun of a dead enemy. In GRAW2 you can kill an enemy, and then pick up their weapon and use that. However this means that you drop the weapon you're currenly using. Perhaps this would be a better system than ME2 with its abundance of weapons lockers?

Not sure about the GRIN version, but most enemy weapons in the Ubisoft version suck compared to ghost weapons.

IceSavage wrote...

ME1 had specific stats of weapons and that needs to return.

It does not need to return. Most people should do with some description and power gamers can find the numbers on the internet.

Special named weapons like Dragon Age has is also a good idea, together with generic weapons.

Unless there is magic involved, there is no real reason to have unique named weapons.

Fabrication rights system would be cool, maybe even a mini crafting system so that we use the mineral resources that we find. Example, you need 20k of this resource to produce the new gun plan you just found/bought. In order to give your companion one as well, you need 40k.

Right, ME3 totally needs more mining.

Modifié par uzivatel, 05 janvier 2011 - 09:00 .