And how exactly do they not radiate heat while inside the weapon? Magic? If it's white-hot when it comes out, logic stands to reason that it would be white-hot while still inside. So those thermal clips aren't shielding the internal components of the weapon from heat anyway.
Wait a sec. Are you basing your argument now on the ejected clips emitting heat into unshielded areas while inside the weapon now? What kind of engineer would make a heat storage system and then let the heatsink be able to pass off the heat unctontrollable inside the item it was supposed to sink heat from?
Look back at the example with the ash again. Burning hot embers emit a vastly reduced heat while buried in the ash. (sink inside the thermal lip in weapon) Remove the embers from the ash coating, and the heat radiation is no longer shielded and will be quite alot bigger (Sink ejected from shielded area in the thermal clip in the weapon)
What's so hard to understand about that?
Here's another simple to understand example: Thermos flask. Coffee inside is burning hot, but appearantly magically I can hold the bottle and feel it is cold on the outside. I pour out the coffee, and it's still hot!
It must be magic?!?!?!
Simple. When I pull the trigger of my sniper rifle, I KNOW it's only firing one round (unless I'm using the Incisor, that is). When I pull the trigger of my shotgun, I KNOW it's only firing one round. When I pull the trigger of my Carnifex pistol, I KNOW it's only firing one round. The operation and rate-of-fire of those weapons is the same as their ME1 counterparts, yet their ability to manage heat has been severely gimped. That is not an upgrade, in my opinion.
The only instance where rate-of-fire can be questioned as you did is with asault rifles and SMGs. The later didn't exist in ME1 so no comparison can be made, and the former doesn't appear to fire any faster or more efficiently. As it's impossile to quantify something that can't be seen, I could just as easily say that assault rifles in ME1 actually fired faster and be just as apt to be correct.
So you omniscently know you only fire one shot. Fair enough. After all, why bother arguing with omniscence?
I mean... If you today can make a rifle that with one squeeze of the trigger fires off 3 shots and the only reason you know you actually fired off 3 shots is because there are 3 shots less in your weapon and you can see a bullethole that is too out of shape to be a single bullet, then ofcourse this technique couldn't have been improved in the future.
But you are omniscent, so why bother.
The difference is that in ME1 I simply wait 3-5 seconds and can fire again whereas my weapon is rendered a useless club if I run out of thermal clips in ME2. Which system would you say is better?
No. There is no difference in my example.
ME1 = You try to squeeze the trigger. Weapon registers discharge of ammunition would be harmfull to weapon and wielder. Weapon refuses to fire.
ME2 = You try to squeeze the trigger. Weapon registers discharge of ammunition
would be harmfull to weapon and wielder. Weapon refuses to fire.
That is the comparison. Your venture down a stray path by claiming you could just wait a couple of secs is the same as me saying that I could just slam a new thermal clip in. Both actions allow the weapon to shoot again, and ironically, considering you are trying to veer down that path of argumentation, the ME1 action is the one taking the longest in time to do.
ME2 says that the clips are storing heat idefinately. Also, several other people in this thread.
For
gameplay purposes, it's indefinate. yes. Just like ammo is unlimited in ME1 for
gameplay purposes.
Would it have been so hard to create a scenario on Aeia where you simply take one of the (older) weapons off a downed hunter and are given unlimited ammo with an overheat bar until the end of the mission? As Christina said, the code for passive weapon cooling is actually in the game, so it couldn't have been terribly difficult to simply activate it briefly for one mission.
Not only would it have been a nice in-game nod to the change in weapons designs, but they could've lowered the rate of fire and/or damage on the older weapon to really rub home how the new designs are actually an improvement, then have the weapon overheat and fail (they're 10 years old, after all) at the end, forcing Shepard to discard it.
Hard? dunno. Would have been a nice touch? definately. Details matters in games where you try and immerse yourself, and this would definately have helped.
Seeing the amount of issues the game have that is caused by not enough time to do Q&A, though, I don't mark it as being bigger than anything else. I would actually mark shepard using weapons in cutscenes he isn't carrying as bigger, or the SMG being holstered inside the handcannon as bigger.
But I agree with you that the game could have used some more polishing to fix the details.
A benefit that you can't see or hear or feel is what I like to call "no real benefit".
Well.. Considering you are rating ME1 weapon kinetic impacts against ME1 shields, and you are rating ME2 weapon kinetic impacts against ME2 shields, you should realize that ME2 shields are also supposedly advanced in technology. Hell, just looking at ME1 you will notice a huge leap in effectiveness of shields as the game progresses. In Revelation, Anderson is using standard N7 armor and shields from that armor go down pretty fast. According to the game, that's armor with a shield value ... 49 ? I think it was. Can't remember it exactly. Anyways, that is alliance special forces issued armor...
We end up with shields that are not twice as effective, but several grades as effective as what is regular for special op troops to use at the start of the game. That's fairly big development of shields, and there is no reason to asume that shield technology stopped progressing between ME1 and ME2, thus meaning that a gun that took away X percentage of a shield in ME1 at the start, would take away a far far far smaller percentage from a shield developed in ME2. Shields still drop down fairly swift in ME2, using ME2 weapons, though, so obviously the kinetic impact of weapons must have improved as well
Look at it this way.
Take 20 people; 10 on one side of the battlefield and 10 on the other. One group has the old-style passive cooling system and the other has the new-style thermal clips. They each start firing. The group with the thermal clip weaponry is able to kill 8 of the opposing group with their "superior firepower" before they run out of thermal clips. There are only 2 people left in the opposing group, but they still have (for all practical purposes) an unlimited supply of ammunition to send downrange. Whether or not the thermal clip weapons deal slightly more damage or can fire slightly faster is moot at this point, as they're not firing anything now and the 2 people left in the opposing group can easily wipe them out at their leisure.
In my opinion, the ME1 model wins hands down here.
In other words, your ME1 weapons are only superior when troops decide to take too little ammo along with them. (and even that is arguable, as the 10 people could still overwhelm the 2 people, albeit at casualties. Not to mention that appearantly they are not carrying anything but their primary weapon so can't use back up weapons, powers, grenades or anything.)
I can construct an artificial scenario too: 10 people fighting 10 engineers. Woops. ME1 weapons are fubared cause they are kept in a perpetual state of overheat. Engineers just waltz over the ME1 weapons but get mowed down by the ME2 weapons cause the thermal clip system prevents sabotage from having an impact on shooting performance.
Yeah, I could throw High Explosive Rounds and dual Scram Rails on my sniper rifle and make it overheat with each shot in ME1, but I was still able to fire an indefinite number of shots downrange every 5 seconds as opposed to one shot every 2 seconds for 12 shots before I run out of "ammo" and I'm forced to give up my position and use my long-range sniper rifle as a short-range club with the new system. How is that an improvement?
To be fair, in a real combat scenario a sniper staying in the same position after having fired 12 shots is dead meat anyway
I realize this effect is limited by the games mechanics, though, and we arrive instead, within the game, at a situation where you always are sniping at a range where your other weapons are also usable.
However, to get back to the point of weapon usability, the sniper rifles worth with the thermal clips relies entirely on the advancement of shield tech and that the thermal clip weapons are producing a significantly higher kinetic impact than the ME1 sniper rifle to offset the 'ammo' limitiation. In other words: If it takes multiple sniper shots to even bring down a shield, it doesn't matter that you can keep firing, reason being that nothing you shoot at is gonna die before it hits cover. So we have to asume that shield technology have actually progressed, thereby requiring the extra damage capabilities the thermal clip system gives in order for the rifle to be practically usable as a snipertool.
edit: I forgot a /quote... *sigh*
Modifié par SalsaDMA, 11 janvier 2011 - 08:39 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
if this breaks down to how you play your shep ...play on easy and use the viper ..if you run out of ammo you suck at shooting 
