241 réponses à ce sujet

[expanding panic]

Weiser_Cain wrote...

expanding panic wrote...

I don't want to have to wait. If I'm aiming at someones chest I want to be able to rapid fire at that person chest without waiting. I give up the power for speed with both the sniper and shot gun. I forget what the guns are called. But they are both the semi automatic. You can not do that in ME1. Again speed kills. 

Also it is not like I'm holding down the trigger and just moving left and right on the screen. I aim and when I have a lock I want to be able to shoot until the guy dies. Just my opinion. I know people like power but again I go more for speed.

The you don't want a Sniper rifle, you want an assault rifle. A,d I'd suggest you use some heat reduction mods, then you can spray and pray to your heart's content.

If I wanted an assault rifle I would have took that option when given the chance on the collector ship. But instead I take the shot gun or sniper there is a reason for that. I even use the first heavy pistol that is given to you because it fires faster then the other ones that you can get. If I have my sights on someone I don't want to have to wait a few seconds to shoot my enemy I want to be able to pull the trigger and not allow them to shoot back. 

[cindercatz]

I loved my sniper rifles in ME1. I'd just line up the shot, scrammed explosive, one shot- one kill, then cover while I picked out my next one, repeat. When the enemy closed, I'd just switch to his pistol/melee for close quarter combat, or with my full biotic, fall back on her powers. (sniper being my extra skill selection, and favored). I never found myself sitting helpless, on the contrary. In ME2 it's the same thing for my playstyle, except that it now takes 3 rapid viper shots, I'm choosing smg or pistol with my infiltraitor (like), my sniping biotic is far less effective because of the new squad biotic cooldown mechanic (hate), and I have to run around picking up clips (boo). The overall gunplay is improved and I like the clip changing animation, but they need to do away with the anti-biotic super shields, squad cooldown, and the chasing clips. Just start you off with x clips, then initiate the heat system when you run. Now you really have to be efficient because there won't be anything to hold your hand when you need that extra quick-clip during the heat of battle. And repower the rifles and biotics. I really enjoyed lifting or pushing enemies off into weightless space on the citadel, etc., and the previous frequency of fire and forget. I like the enemy to have to adapt to my tactics as much as I'm adapting to theirs'. ME2 is fun but far too repetitive (and silent) in combat, so much so I ended up skipping as many non-squad side missions as possible during my second character playthrough. More mixin' it up is good.

[Whereto]

Heres my two cents,



I find on insanity is where the ammo system comes into play. With me1 if an enemy had shields, armor or anything in between, i wouldn't change guns. It was a simple fact that each gun was better than another gun at something, but I had infinite ammo, so what was the point of changing. Just fire the assault rifle all the time as it was just to easy not to worry about changing weapons. But in me2 you cant afford to not care what weapon your using, ammo isnt easy to get to sometimes so you would be running low and end up having to switch guns. In mass effect 1, there was no tactics related to gun use of specific units. In me2 you dont use a pistol on a shielded unit and you dont use a shot gun at long range( unless its the geth shoty). I found in me1 you could use any gun on any target, in me2 u have to think if i can afford to waste this ammo if its not as effective on that unit.



Short: ME2 makes you play more tactically due to the ammo system regulating the use of ineffective guns. That relegates you to using different guns and having to think what is best

[Lotion Soronarr]

Katamariguy wrote...

The laws of thermodynamics.

Shh....don't tell them they exist.

[Praetor Knight]

Gleym wrote...

Sure was nice of the Alliance to land on Aeia where Jacob's dad and all those soldiers were stranded, upgrade all of their weapons and leave them a ton of thermal clips before abandoning them. Or to replace all of the Geth's weaponry with thermal clips variants as well. I mean, shucks, the Alliance is so nice, they even went ahead and supplied the Quarian Flotilla with the latest, state-of-the-art weaponry that runs on thermal clips, even though Quarians have to scrounge for everything all the same. And let's not forget how swell they are for supplying all of Omega, a crime den that survives on the black market of weapon mods-- Oh, wait, sorry, weapon mods don't exist anymore.

Yeah. Sure does make perfect sense to me.

It sure was nice of them!

The Alliance, leveling the Galactic playing field, one field retrofit at a time...


Seriously though, all I can figure is that, again for gameplay streamlining, the Thermal Clips are found pre-made everywhere for gameplay convenience.

I figure that Thermal Clips are made from items found on the battlefield. So, un-animated, Shep & Co are converting items like scrap metal, enemy weapons, enemy heat sinks and so on into omnigel and then using that omnigel to make Thermal Clips that are then used to reload the weapons.

The theory is based on how ME handled items as you fought enemies, you could either pickup and use the weapons found, or turn them into omnigel immediately or later on.

Omnitools are awe inspiring by the way. :innocent:

Personally I would prefer that, after a firefight, the Thermal Capacity of the weapons would be replenished automatically for ME3 instead of scavenging.


**************************
Either way, it would be cool to acknowledge how Thermal Clips work somehow in ME3, in maybe a Codex entry or better yet, dialogue similar to how omnigel was brought up in an awesome DLC.

Squadmate: Shep, weapons dry, can't fire!

Shep: You're right, I'm out too. Use your omnitool and breakdown that box over there. We need more Clips!

Squadmate: Gah! Why don't you break down YOUR cover!? They're still shooting at us!

Shep: Cuz, I'm charge that's why! Besides I've got Medigel...

Squadmate: , Where's Grunt when you need him?

[Xerxes52]

I think ammo clips are fine in combat, but once you are out of combat (i.e. weapons holstered), there should be a way to rapidly cool off your weapons (i.e. restore ammo to full).

[thegreateski]

I prefered the overheating mechanic. It was different, It was new, It was . . . interesting. It was nice to see that technology had actually advanced in the future rather then having us kill each other with the same ol' guns.





Call me a rebel.

[Praetor Knight]

Xerxes52 wrote...

I think ammo clips are fine in combat, but once you are out of combat (i.e. weapons holstered), there should be a way to rapidly cool off your weapons (i.e. restore ammo to full).

Just to add, ME2 weapons use multiple heat sinks, so there is no need to cool the heat sink, simply eject the spent one and load in a fresh one.

Thermal Clips might even work like a Speedloader and never go inside the weapons, so you should be able to quickly swap between Thermal Clips to reload the weapon's Thermal Capacity.

Here is an example of one type of contemporary Speedloader.

[Praetor Knight]

thegreateski wrote...

I prefered the overheating mechanic. It was different, It was new, It was . . . interesting. It was nice to see that technology had actually advanced in the future rather then having us kill each other with the same ol' guns.

Technically the heat sinks still overheat in ME2, but instead of waiting for a cool down it gets ejected and replaced with another heat sink.

[JaegerBane]

thegreateski wrote...

I prefered the overheating mechanic. It was different, It was new, It was . . . interesting. It was nice to see that technology had actually advanced in the future rather then having us kill each other with the same ol' guns.

I agree with the 'interesting' remark, not so much with the 'advancement' remark. In terms of technological advancement, having 'ammunition' in the future that is super-light, common to all firearms, completely inert and stored entirely within the weapon until needed - meaning reloading is a matter of hitting a button - yet still allows all the use we see today sounds pretty advanced to me.

[Destructo-Bot]

Whereto wrote...

Heres my two cents,

I find on insanity is where the ammo system comes into play. With me1 if an enemy had shields, armor or anything in between, i wouldn't change guns. It was a simple fact that each gun was better than another gun at something, but I had infinite ammo, so what was the point of changing. Just fire the assault rifle all the time as it was just to easy not to worry about changing weapons. But in me2 you cant afford to not care what weapon your using, ammo isnt easy to get to sometimes so you would be running low and end up having to switch guns. In mass effect 1, there was no tactics related to gun use of specific units. In me2 you dont use a pistol on a shielded unit and you dont use a shot gun at long range( unless its the geth shoty). I found in me1 you could use any gun on any target, in me2 u have to think if i can afford to waste this ammo if its not as effective on that unit.

Short: ME2 makes you play more tactically due to the ammo system regulating the use of ineffective guns. That relegates you to using different guns and having to think what is best

I know I wasn't the only one with one weapon loaded with shield bypass rounds, another with anti-personnel, another with anti-synthetic, one to stop regeneration, and of course one with high explosive rounds.

Modifié par Destructo-Bot, 19 janvier 2011 - 05:58 .

[darknoon5]

Thermal clips>overheating

[thegreateski]

Overheating > Thermal clips.

[JaegerBane]

darknoon5 wrote...

Thermal clips>overheating

...

Opinions tend to get a lot more respect when backed up with reasoning

[Ulzeraj]

Its laughable how specter weapon + 2 frictionless materials allowed you to shoot nonstop forever. Can't immagine why people agree with that.

[Praetor Knight]

Ulzeraj wrote...

Its laughable how specter weapon + 2 frictionless materials allowed you to shoot nonstop forever. Can't immagine why people agree with that.

Agree with what? Using an overpowered gamebreaker? Please, explain. Thanks in advance.

[JKoopman]

Ulzeraj wrote...

Its laughable how specter weapon + 2 frictionless materials allowed you to shoot nonstop forever. Can't immagine why people agree with that.

Do I agree that slapping 2 Frictionless Material X mods in your Spectre X weapon and being able to fire forever was necessarily good game design? No.

Do I agree that the in-game description of thermal clips allowing for increased rates of fire makes sense in light of being able to fire forever with the aforementioned 2 Frictionless Material X mods in your Spectre X weapon? No.

Do I agree that completely gutting the overheat mechanic and replacing it with a limited thermal clip system was the only solution to the problem when they could've simply removed or rebalanced the Frictionless Material mods? No.

Do I agree that putting 2 Frictionless Material X mods in your Spectre X weapon was a player choice and people may as well b*tch about a game being too easy because they downloaded a trainer and gave themselves unlimited health and ammunition? Emphatically yes.

Modifié par JKoopman, 19 janvier 2011 - 06:19 .

[darknoon5]

JaegerBane wrote...

darknoon5 wrote...

Thermal clips>overheating

...

Opinions tend to get a lot more respect when backed up with reasoning

Fine then.
Mass effect is a shooter/RPG.

Ammo is a key shooter element, which makes you have to decided which weapons to use against which enemies. It also means you have to shoot tactically, instead of mindlessly spraying for 5 minutes before your weapon overheats.

Thermal clips improve the tactical side of the shooter elements. It's a no brainer, tbh. Thermal clips>overheating, any day of the week.

Mass effect 1, despite being a great game, was a lacklustre shooter. Mass effect 2 rectified this in several ways, including thermal clips.

Modifié par darknoon5, 19 janvier 2011 - 06:21 .

[JKoopman]

darknoon5 wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

darknoon5 wrote...

Thermal clips>overheating

...

Opinions tend to get a lot more respect when backed up with reasoning

Fine then.
Mass effect is a shooter/RPG.

Ammo is a key shooter element, which makes you have to decided which weapons to use against which enemies. It also means you have to shoot tactically, instead of mindlessly spraying for 5 minutes before your weapon overheats.

Thermal clips improve the tactical side of the shooter elements. It's a no brainer, tbh. Thermal clips>overheating, any day of the week.

Mass effect 1, despite being a great game, was a lacklustre shooter. Mass effect 2 rectified this in several ways, including thermal clips.

Forcing the player to aim more accurately or else run out of ammunition for his weapons does not make a game more "tactical". It simply makes it appeal more to generic shooter fans.

For that matter, how is a system that requires the player to manage heat any less tactical than one that requires the player to manage ammunition? That there were mods that allowed the player to circumvent heat management does not mean that the overheat mechanic was inherently flawed; only that certain weapon mods were unbalancing. And simply rebalancing them would've been a far easier and more palatable solution than gutting the system entirely and replacing it with ammo thermal clips.

Modifié par JKoopman, 19 janvier 2011 - 06:25 .

[darknoon5]

JKoopman wrote...

darknoon5 wrote...

JaegerBane wrote...

darknoon5 wrote...

Thermal clips>overheating

...

Opinions tend to get a lot more respect when backed up with reasoning

Fine then.
Mass effect is a shooter/RPG.

Ammo is a key shooter element, which makes you have to decided which weapons to use against which enemies. It also means you have to shoot tactically, instead of mindlessly spraying for 5 minutes before your weapon overheats.

Thermal clips improve the tactical side of the shooter elements. It's a no brainer, tbh. Thermal clips>overheating, any day of the week.

Mass effect 1, despite being a great game, was a lacklustre shooter. Mass effect 2 rectified this in several ways, including thermal clips.

Forcing the player to aim more accurately or else run out of ammunition for his weapons does not make a game more "tactical". It simply makes it appeal more to generic shooter fans.

For that matter, how is a system that requires the player to manage heat any less tactical than one that requires the player to manage ammunition? That there were mods that allowed the player to circumvent heat management does not mean that the overheat mechanic was inherently flawed; only that certain weapon mods were unbalancing. And simply rebalancing them would've been a far easier and more palatable solution than gutting the system entirely and replacing it with ammo thermal clips.

If you find the game difficult, play causal. It is a shooter RPG, has been from the start. And I'm not a generic shooter fan, I only really enjoy the halo and half life games.

If you honestly think overheating is better, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but nobody can deny overheating was seriously flawed, and made changing weapons pointless. It also meant aiming was less important, like I said. That eqautes to more tactical. (by that I mean not using immunity, then popping out of cover with an assault rifle and firing non-stop.)

Also, managing clips is different, as weapons with less ammo are saved for harder enemies, as you need to pick up clips to use them. And you still manage how much you shoot, just like with heat management, to get the best use of your clip.

I brought Mass effect always knowing it was a shooter. I go more for the RPG side of things, but I was not suprised, or dissapointed, with the introduction of an ammo system.

Modifié par darknoon5, 19 janvier 2011 - 06:33 .

[Ulzeraj]

JKoopman wrote...

Forcing the player to aim more accurately or else run out of ammunition for his weapons does not make a game more "tactical". It simply makes it appeal more to generic shooter fans.

Disagree here. Infinite resources can be counter-gameplay even on RPG. Gameplay-wise an infinite resource makes the player forget about it while the finite resource forces the player to manage it and make choices. Choices are fun.

Examples?

Infinite money on ME1 (oh god please forgive me for pointing design flaws on sacred me1). I just bought what I wanted because I had 8 million credits and the most expensive things cost what? 500k? On ME2 I had fewer stuff to buy of course but I had to chose what to buy and when. Eventually you can buy it all but making the player to think "hey I'm going to return here later to get this tech upgrade" is a step forward gameplay-wise.

On ME1 player had to watch for inventory space. He had to chose what to turn into omni-gel, what weapon/armor equip should go to X squadmate and what to sell. Thats good! On ME2 you just don't have inventory and aside from a very few equipment choices (what will I use as armor... what weapon should I pick on collector's base?) you just don't worry with that. It can be bad.

I can think of another example that affected me at the time but its not ME-related. I used to heal on high end raids on world of warcrafts until up to WotLK. During most of the WotlK expansion healer mana was almost infinite (and playing as a holy paladin I had a huge mana pool) and you could just shoot mega-heals non-stop at everything even while they werent taking damage. That was boring. Recently blizzard modified all the healing mechanics... and instead of 2 spells we had 6-8 each one depending on the circunstance. And worse... you could end out of mana and the tank could die wiping the raid and the other 24 people would be pointing at you for making poor use of your abilities.
Sure... a lot of people complained about the changes. You couldn't watch tv and heal at the same time... but healing was fun again. Hey heavy damage on raid/tank inc... should I press 1,2 or 3? I should use this ability that reduces the cost of my healing spells... or I should user other that other that make them stronger and faster (thus casting more and spending more mana)? I know wow mechanics are very complex with tons of numbers to deal but its still RPG (D&D{3{.5},4}rd was very stat-centric too and noone dares to discards it as RPG).


Ignoring all the codex and cannon explanations in a gameplay-wise approach (because I don't want to discuss with ME1 zealots) limited thermal clips is a very good addition to the game. It makes you chose what weapon should make the most of such encounter or makes players paranoid at resources during an encounter on insanity level. And this is good™.

About frictionless materials... I dont really know if it was a design flaw. It made me feel of poor developed games where you reach a point you're invencible. It kills end-game experience.

Modifié par Ulzeraj, 19 janvier 2011 - 06:57 .

[Praetor Knight]

JKoopman wrote...

Forcing the player to aim more accurately or else run out of ammunition for his weapons does not make a game more "tactical". It simply makes it appeal more to generic shooter fans.

For that matter, how is a system that requires the player to manage heat any less tactical than one that requires the player to manage ammunition? That there were mods that allowed the player to circumvent heat management does not mean that the overheat mechanic was inherently flawed; only that certain weapon mods were unbalancing. And simply rebalancing them would've been a far easier and more palatable solution than gutting the system entirely and replacing it with ammo thermal clips.

Well, I've played the soldier the most in both ME and M2, gotten to lvl 60 in ME, and play on Insanity for both games (ME2 is more enjoyable on that setting than ME, IMHO).

Although managing Thermal Clips can get tedious for only a very small number of areas, Thermal Clips are a solid improvement overall, IMHO.



I don't get all of the "shooter" / "tactical" comments, and also don't know what to say about all the retcon comments that have been posted in many other threads, so I've simply tried to get back to square one and figure out the differences, between the two games and share what I've found.

Also, the overheat mechanic was not gutted.

It is still in ME2, but instead of waiting for cooling, you eject, fire again, rinse and repeat.

[ianmcdonald]

Here's a question: Why wouldn't you want your product to appeal to the widest audience possible?

[darknoon5]

ianmcdonald wrote...

Here's a question: Why wouldn't you want your product to appeal to the widest audience possible?

Because every shooter fan only enjoys shooters and are uneducated, apparently.

[JKoopman]

Ulzeraj wrote...

[snip]Choices are fun.[/snip]

Exactly. Choice. I have no choice in ME2. It was fun in ME1 when I could choose to play a sniper-exclusive Infiltrator and only switch to my pistol in CQB. It was fun in ME1 when I could choose to load my assault rifle with Frictionless Materials mods and High-Explosive Rounds and pretend my Soldier was carrying around a .50 cal machinegun. Now that choice is gone and I see very little if any benefit for it's loss.

Thermal clips encourage you to switch weapons? The rock-paper-scissors armor mechanic in ME2 does that, not the ammo mechanic. The ammo mechanic forces you to switch weapons, whether the situation favors a switch or not, which doesn't benefit the player in any way. You could spam-fire weapons endlessly in ME1? That was an issue with unbalanced weapon mods, not the overheating mechanic. I could turn on Immunity and just charge into a firefight without any thought or planning? Again, that's an argument against unbalanced abilities, and isn't even applicable as ME2 got rid of it. Thermal clips make combat more tactical? No moreso than managing heat did in ME1. Managing ammo is a logistical concern, not a tactical concern. Perhaps some people enjoy micro-managing ammunition, but as these same people often argue against having to micro-manage inventory and squad armor in ME1, I find that a little strange.

Every argument I've seen in favor of the thermal clip system is actually an argument in favor of or against something else, and could easily be accomplished with the overheat mechanic still in place. What it all seems to boil down to is simply "I enjoy generic shooters and I favor a system that is familiar to me."

Modifié par JKoopman, 19 janvier 2011 - 07:26 .