451 réponses à ce sujet

[SalsaDMA]

JKoopman wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

JKoopman wrote...
You must be oh-so wise to be able to infer the real reason why an entire group of people dislike the current system. Either that or you don't know crap and you're just generalizing an entirely group to make your position look stronger.

In addition to the inconsistency with the lore annoying me, I don't like being forced to use weapons that I don't wish to. I played through all of ME1 as a spec-ops sniper who only broke out her pistol for extreme CQB situations. Suddenly, in ME2, I'm forced to use my SMG and pistol through 90% of the game because my sniper rifle is constantly low on ammo thermal clips. It ruins my ability to role-play my character the way I wish to.

I once wanted to roleplay a priest of Thor in a D&D setting and wanted my hammer to return by itself whenever I threw it.

The DM wouldn't allow me to, though, saying that if I threw my hammer, it ended up where it landed.

So I guess he 'ruined me ability to role-play my character the way I wished to' back then.

Interesting anaology. Now put it in a setting where you were previously allowed to "throw your hammer and have it return by itself" but suddenly that ability is removed in the sequel. Kinda ruins your established "Priest of Thor" character concept, doesn't it?

Not if I had swapped my hammer of returning out with another hammer. Different weapons, but I wanted them to perform the same.

Hmm...

[Terror_K]

The problem isn't so much that the gameplay didn't fit in with the lore as it is the fact that they did such a ******-poor job of integrating it into the lore in a sensible way, and filled it with so many plot-holes, inconsistencies and contradictions that it's beyond belief. The writers should have been smart enough to see Aeia as an issue and find some way to explain it, and they should have had the sense to not have Zaeed referring to using Thermal Clips before they were even around, etc. And that's not even going into the fact we're supposed to believe that the entire universe has adopted this entirely within two years to the extent of completely destroying all old weapons, even petty criminals and quarians, etc.



The basic reasoning behind of efficiency adopting the technology is fairly good, but beyond that everything else was terrible, leaving us with a whole concept that's got more holes than a lace table cloth. Somebody mentioned that with the old guns enemies had the ability to overload and overheat them, and things like that could have been additional reasons for preferring a thermal clip system, but it's never brought up. Almost all signs point to a hybrid system being more logical lore wise, and many fans even think that this would be better gameplay wise as well.



I know there's a whole conceit that gameplay trumps lore when it comes to these things, but I have to question as to where to draw the line here and when gameplay trumps lore to the point of ruining the universe and the experience of Mass Effect entirely. The fact is, the thermal clip system has damn near made a farce out of the entire universe, not for gameplay reasons but due to how badly its been incorporated into the lore. And I have to question --as somebody who views Mass Effect as more than just a series of games-- is it really worth doing that and pissing on the credibility of your IP's universe for the sake one one single gameplay mechanic?



Also, as far as being the best for gameplay, from what perspective? From the perspective of this being a shooter, or it being an RPG? And lets be honest here, it's not exactly a big innovation on BioWare's part. All they've done is essentially add an ammo system to the game... that's pretty much it. Sure, it's not technically ammo, but it's just an ammo system in another form. This isn't innovation and making grand steps forward, this is just resorting to tried and true mechanics that have been around for decades now. I suppose one could say that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" and that some mechanics are simply good for a reason. But I could also say that about a lot of elements from ME1 that went the way of the dodo in ME2, so... yeah.



What it comes down to for me is that the lore and universe took a big kick in the crotch for what essentially is an ammo system. It just doesn't seem a good enough reason for me for lore to take such a nasty wallop.

[The Spamming Troll]

sinosleep wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

No. But then, if I cared about what other games were doing, I'd be on their message boards complaining about them instead of here on this message board complaining about this. The simple fact is, better explanations and methods for implementing thermal clips have been proposed more times than I'd care to list by fans on this board, so it's rather sad that one so poor and so riddled with oversights was chosen to be put in the game considering the level of detail and quality present in so much else in the game.

It was chosen because ....

Christina Norman wrote...

Sinosleep mentioned there were questions on the forum about the prototype head dissipation system discovered in the ME2 coalasced.ini file. I'm home sick so this is a great time to write up a little gameplay info for you guys.

I believe strongly in experimentation over debate in determining design. I encourage my design team to feel free to try out different approaches in gameplay, we keep what works, and we disable what doesn't work.

The way we generally try a new feature is we implement it and we gate it via an INI setting. The heat dissipation system in ME2 (which I implemented) is one such system. I implemented, put in an INI setting to control access to it, and tried it out.

Like many systems we experiment with, that system did not make it into the final game. The heat sink system we shipped with was one of the most extensively tested systems, and it produced the best combat gameplay. However, I chose to leave in the prototype heat dissipation system because I generally believe in leaving in prototype systems if they are not harmful. As a result, players are free to experiment with this system which otherwise wouldn't be available to anyone.

I'm not going to get into an IP debate, but I can say that all gameplay changes are reviewed for IP consistency which is why there is an IP explanation for the change in how weapons operate from ME1 to ME2. Ultimately this decision was driven by our improved combat gameplay design for ME2, but was fully backed up by our continually developing IP.

Gameplay.....
over.....
lore.....

They tried a "better" hybrid system and found it wanting in comparison to thermal clips.

those are just words put together to make you feel satisfied about playing a game in which its basic fundamentals were drastically changed. when you say "gameplay over lore" your implying something was already wrong with the previouse gameplay, which was based on a very logically thought out lore, right? then saying a complete rehaul of the former system into one that isnt anywhere similar to the opriginal, is a gameplay decision?

the first time shooting a gun in ME2 made sense to you? the first time i pulled the trigger after i awoke from my regenerative slumber, i knew something was very very wrong. i wasnt playing mass effect anymore, i was playing an almost unrecognizable ME spinoff, or something.

[sinosleep]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

those are just words put together to make you feel satisfied about playing a game in which its basic fundamentals were drastically changed. when you say "gameplay over lore" your implying something was already wrong with the previouse gameplay, which was based on a very logically thought out lore, right? then saying a complete rehaul of the former system into one that isnt anywhere similar to the opriginal, is a gameplay decision?

the first time shooting a gun in ME2 made sense to you? the first time i pulled the trigger after i awoke from my regenerative slumber, i knew something was very very wrong. i wasnt playing mass effect anymore, i was playing an almost unrecognizable ME spinoff, or something.

It felt fine to me cause the shooting was designed to behave like it does in most traditional shooters, which considering I LIKE traditional shooters is a GOOD thing.

I like RPGS, I LOATHE RPG mechanics on guns. It's always felt like a terrible match, which is why as far as gameplay mechanics go I'll take an ME 2 or Borderlands over ME 1 any day of the week. The shooter parts of the game play like traditional shooters, they leave the RPG features to parts of the game where they're more suited like having skill strees and classes.

[The Spamming Troll]

we might as well play as marcus pheonix in ME3. theres not much distinction between ME1 and ME2, other then the word "shepard." ME1 was an awesome game with unique overheating, modable weapons, besides the other amazing things ME1 offers. ME2 gives me nothing i cant get from another game, while ME1 will blow your god damned mind. they went from mind blowing, to "heres something youve done a million times before."

id take ME2s gameplay over ME1s as well. becuase ME1 didnt have location damage, flashy new visuals, interesting weapon variety, larger squadmate choice, elec/decryp not needed for unlocking crates, even the new spin on weapon mods is something i can appreciate. but why remove those things that made mass effect, Mass Effect? atleast to me it seems that way.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 12 janvier 2011 - 03:03 .

[sinosleep]

sinosleep wrote...

Yeah, Gears

in space
with stat based powers
with a controllable squad
with classes
with dialogue trees
with player control of narrative decisions
with side quests

I could go on but with some people, what's the point?

[cachx]

sinosleep wrote...

Yeah, Gears

in space
with stat based powers
with a controllable squad
with classes
with dialogue trees
with player control of narrative decisions
with side quests

I could go on but with some people, what's the point?

Someone give this man a medal.

[kstarler]

I don't normally chime in on threads like this anymore, because I kinda figure, "What the points? Folks are going to believe how they are going to believe."

However, I am currently playing through ME1 again (as a Vanguard) on Insanity (to refresh my memory as to just how awful it is). I have died no fewer than 10 times because my pistol overheated (at level 21, I'm STILL using the Striker II because no other pistols have dropped and I'm saving for the Spectre pistol), and I was forced to switch to a weapon I have no training in (because cover is either non-existant or pointless due to enemy swarming, so no waiting for cooling), and thus couldn't hit the broad side of a barn or fire for more than 3 seconds without overheating.

I think folks are romanticising how weapons worked in ME1, or they aren't playing on the higher difficulty levels. Now, it's fine that they aren't because the game is balanced for Normal play, and I would even say it is fine for me to die so much on Insanity, because it's supposed to be a challenge. But overheating definitely has its problems. If ME1 had an ammo system (and didn't have stat based weapon use), I'd have been able to save myself in 90% of those above described situations. That is why BioWare went with the system in place in ME2. Love it or hate it, there are reasons for it.

I won't address the lore side of the issue, because I believe SalsaDMA made the best case for the ammo system. Personally, I like both games, but feet to the fire, combat in ME2 is better because of the improved mechanics. But, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.

[ianmcdonald]

I never thought of it this way. I can't take the game seriously anymore and should probably go throw my copy in the trash.





First world problems, man.

[JKoopman]

sinosleep wrote...

sinosleep wrote...

Yeah, Gears

in space
with stat based powers
with a controllable squad
with classes
with dialogue trees
with player control of narrative decisions
with side quests

I could go on but with some people, what's the point?

Like it or not, agree with it or not, "Oh my God, this game has become Gears of War with a dialog wheel" was the first impression a great many ME1 players had upon first playing ME2.

It's an overly-simplistic analogy perhaps, but it serves well enough to drive home the point that Mass Effect combat has become a carbon clone of every other "herp derp" shooter on the market with little originality or innovation.

[JoltDealer]

Personally, I'd like it if the old system returned or at least made the use of thermal clips optional. I had originally thought that thermal clips were an optional way to continue firing without having to wait for the gun to cool. I liked having the ability to adjust my weapon's performance. I could make my gun comparable to a light machine gun or an assault rifle just by shifting my focus between heat generation, damage, and accuracy. The only thing wrong with the guns in Mass Effect 1 was that you needed to level up several times to use it accurately.

[sinosleep]

JKoopman wrote...

Like it or not, agree with it or not, "Oh my God, this game has become Gears of War with a dialog wheel" was the first impression a great many ME1 players had upon first playing ME2.

It's an overly-simplistic analogy perhaps, but it serves well enough to drive home the point that Mass Effect combat has become a carbon clone of every other "herp derp" shooter on the market with little originality or innovation.

For one, great many, that's a laugh.

Secondly, and for the fourth time, I suppose every "herp derp" shooter on the market has

stat based powers
a controllable squad
classes
dialogue trees 
player control of narrative decisions 
side quests
romances
etc
etc
etc

It's not an overly simplistic analogy, it's flat out wrong.

Modifié par sinosleep, 12 janvier 2011 - 03:52 .

[slimgrin]

Just give Shepard ammo. That's what the retcon is meant to be anyway. Since so many are convinced you can't have another mechanic in shooters other than ammo clips.

[kstarler]

slimgrin wrote...

Just give Shepard ammo. That's what the retcon is meant to be anyway. Since so many are convinced you can't have another mechanic in shooters other than ammo clips.

Can you actually give an example of someone saying that? Because I've read most of the posts here and I don't recall anyone saying that ammo is the only way to go. There are folks that have said of the available options, it is the best way, but I don't think anyone has said what you have said. Can you please provide a quote or two?

[JKoopman]

sinosleep wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Like it or not, agree with it or not, "Oh my God, this game has become Gears of War with a dialog wheel" was the first impression a great many ME1 players had upon first playing ME2.

It's an overly-simplistic analogy perhaps, but it serves well enough to drive home the point that Mass Effect combat has become a carbon clone of every other "herp derp" shooter on the market with little originality or innovation.

For one, great many, that's a laugh.

Secondly, and for the fourth time, I suppose every "herp derp" shooter on the market has

stat based powers
a controllable squad
classes
dialogue trees 
player control of narrative decisions 
side quests
romances
etc
etc
etc

It's not an overly simplistic analogy, it's flat out wrong.

Yes, a great many, judging by how frequently the phrase was thrown around in the weeks and months following ME2's release. Almost every thread criticizing the game had the words "Gears with a dialog wheel" somewhere in the text.

As for your list, only two of those affect combat in any way; and one of them was actually featured in Gears of War (GoW1 had squad control).

Modifié par JKoopman, 12 janvier 2011 - 04:08 .

[sinosleep]

Oh really? In Gears one you had full control of your squad in that you command them to do whatever it was you needed them to do with a press of a button, cause I don't remember that.

And now we're only counting combat related aspects of the game and dismissing everything else? You seriously don't think that's absolutely absurd? Combat is not the only thing that makes up a game. You can't call ME 2 Gears with dialogue while dismissing everything that differentiates the two franchises by virtue of some of those things not being combat related. Not only that, but your math is off

class choice has an effect combat (vanguard doesn't play like an adept)
powers have an effect combat
controllable squad has an effect on combat (and no what Gears had isn't comparable)

http://www.metacriti...-2/user-reviews

User reviews are at 9.0, I see all of ONE user review on the front page that mentions Gears in a negative light. So yeah, great many is LAUGHABLE. A vocal minority on these boards? Sure. A great many overall, not even remotely close.

Modifié par sinosleep, 12 janvier 2011 - 04:16 .

[cachx]

JKoopman wrote...
 "Oh my God, this game has become Gears of War with a dialog wheel" was the first impression a great many ME1 players had upon first playing ME2.

My sympathies to those players, all 5 of them.

[Epic777]

~Sigh~ me1 vs me2 Which round is it now?

[slimgrin]

cachx wrote...

JKoopman wrote...
 "Oh my God, this game has become Gears of War with a dialog wheel" was the first impression a great many ME1 players had upon first playing ME2.

My sympathies to those players, all 5 of them.

Please. If ME2 isn't the very definition of casual gaming, I don't know what is.

[sinosleep]

Epic777 wrote...

~Sigh~ me1 vs me2 Which round is it now?

At least 20.

[cachx]

Epic777 wrote...
~Sigh~ me1 vs me2 Which round is it now?

Pff, it has been going so long, I can predict the flow of the conversation now.

Next, is time for snobbish PC-RPG Master Race comments

slimgrin wrote...
Please. If ME2 isn't the very definition of casual gaming, I don't know what is.

Zing! right on cue.

[Giantdeathrobot]

 I very much agree with sinosleep and Norman. Hell, to test an 'hybrid' system, I found a little mod that regenerates ammo but prevents you from manually reloading (so the ammo count functions as heat, obviously). The only result is that I either spent several more seconds in cover (boring) or just wasted ammo in order to get on with it already (which kinda kills the point of efficiency, doesn't it). A universal clip system would not change the fact that this system only bogged down the combat.

This is not a 'dumbing down' issue. If I play a shooter (which the ME series is supposed to be), I want to play a good one, not an half-assed shooter/RPG hybrid that doesn't know what it is, and ends up being poor in both categories as a result. Conversations, classes, skills trees and powers are much more important parts of a game being an RPG than my gun missing all the time or the combat being dull as hell. 

I just do not understand the 'ME2 is Gears herp derp' attitude. We got a classic ammo system instead of overheating. That's it. Powers are still there, controlable squad is still there, everything that makes ME series combat unique. Waiting in cover does not make a combat system unique, it makes it boring, and since this is a game ithisis bad, regardless of complaints about it being less RPGish or intellectual or something <_<.

ME2 is not void of issues of course, but the combat is by far an upgrade over the first game.

[Epic777]

sinosleep wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

~Sigh~ me1 vs me2 Which round is it now?

At least 20.

To the original topic; thermal clips makes as much sense as the geth armory license from me1.

[slimgrin]

There's always the possibility that I'm not comparing ME2 to ME1. But the game's like a damn religion on this site. Flawless.

Modifié par slimgrin, 12 janvier 2011 - 05:08 .

[JKoopman]

sinosleep wrote...

And now we're only counting combat related aspects of the game and dismissing everything else? You seriously don't think that's absolutely absurd? Combat is not the only thing that makes up a game. You can't call ME 2 Gears with dialogue while dismissing everything that differentiates the two franchises by virtue of some of those things not being combat related.

I had said "It's an overly-simplistic analogy perhaps, but it serves well enough to drive home the point that Mass Effect combat has become a carbon clone of every other "herp derp" shooter on the market with little originality or innovation." I had assumed that combat was what we were discussing...

sinosleep wrote...

Not only that, but your math is off

class choice has an effect combat (vanguard doesn't play like an adept)
powers have an effect combat
controllable squad has an effect on combat (and no what Gears had isn't comparable)

class choices only affect combat in that different classes have different powers. If you're going to count classes and powers as differentiating factors then you're basically counting the same thing twice.

At the end of the day, an analogy doesn't have to be literal truth to make it's point. I can say "This cheeze pizza is like hot lava" without it actually being 2400°F...

sinosleep wrote...

http://www.metacriti...-2/user-reviews

User reviews are at 9.0, I see all of ONE user review on the front page that mentions Gears in a negative light. So yeah, great many is LAUGHABLE. A vocal minority on these boards? Sure. A great many overall, not even remotely close.

To quote a age-old internet proverb; McDonalds is popular, but that doesn't make a BigMac fine cuisine.

Modifié par JKoopman, 12 janvier 2011 - 04:37 .