241 réponses à ce sujet

[Felfenix]

JKoopman wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

Maybe if you turned on your brain and aimed, or thought about what guns you used, you wouldn't run out of ammo? Complaining that the game punishes you for playing with your brain turned off is your problem. Using one gun and complaining it doesn't work out in ME2 is like complaining DAO isn't tactical because you have to min/max or micromanage your party.

"Turning on my brain and aiming" doesn't mean much when I'm facing down 8 Mercs and a YMIR mech at long range. It's pretty much a foregone conclussion that I'm going to run out of clips in my sniper rifle before that battle is over. So yes, I'm forced quite regularly to use a weapon that I don't like for no other reason than because I've run out of ammo through no fault of my own and the only spare clips are 100 yards downrange.

Now drop the attitude and calm the hell down.

OK, internet tough guy.

Go complain on the DAO forums that your naked unarmed warrior isn't as effective. "Why isn't my playstyle just as effective as anyone else's?" You want to be able to win the game easily regardless of what you do, and if casual difficulty isn't enough for you, then the problem is you. The weapons have an ammo limitation for a reason, to make you either take the risk or seeking out ammo / moving around the battlefield or making use of your full arsenal instead of equipping your sniper rifle and rolling your face on the keyboard. If you run out of ammo, it's your own fault for not playing tactically.

Internet tough guy, says the one throwing insults around anonymously on a message board.

Total straw man argument, again. If I hadn't been allowed to use a sniper rifle exclusively in ME1 and therefor set a character precedent as a sniper, I wouldn't feel the need to complain about that fact that my character now spends 90% of the game with an SMG.

To use your oh-so-clever example, that would be like if you were perfectly able to play through DA:O as a naked monk character who beats enemies to death with his fists and suddenly in DA:O2 they change it so that your character can no longer unequip weapons and you're required to wear platemail at all times. Kinda wrecks your character, doesn't it?

ME2 is a different game. They make improvements from game to game. Otherwise, ME1 would be the only game and they'd just keep releasing DLC for it. Instead of making up exaggerated BS like "ANYONE WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH ME THINKS ME2 IS PERFECT!" or "I HAVE TO SPEND 90% OF THE TIME WITH AN SMG!" and throwing out profanity while calling me out personality, you should try to argue valid points. Valid points, not made up exaggerations. That doesn't prove anything to anyone.

If you're spending "90%" of the time with an SMG, then you're both missing like crazy AND turtling up on the battlefield, which is just playing poorly and you should set the difficulty to casual. ME2 is taking a step in a more tactical direction in that in rewards weighing pros and cons, instead of just mindlessly doing one thing with no downside. Player have to either take risks for something they want (overcoming a limitation) or adapt to that limitation, playing to their arsenal's strengths and weaknesses. I use my sniper rifle the majority of the time, and I play on insanity, but I don't have those issues because I find a solution. You should think about how things work instead of jumping to find someone or something else to blame.

If you want to use the sniper rifle almost exclusively, use the viper (it almost never runs out of ammo, even if you purposely skip most clips) and aim for heads. Unlike ME1, every weapon in ME2 has strengths and weaknesses, and aren't just linear upgrades. The Widow is the most impressive per single shot, but it's slow and has almost no clip capacity. Tactical is adapting to the situation using the strengths and weaknesses of what you have at your disposal, excercising options. It's not stubbornly trying something that doesn't work over and over again without thinking how you can tweak that "plan".

Modifié par Felfenix, 20 janvier 2011 - 05:34 .

[Schneidend]

Jkoop, I'd recommend using the Incisor or Viper if you're finding yourself low on sniper ammo. Also, using sniper shots on targets with Shields/Barriers can be a waste of ammo, especially if you miss the headshot.



The Locust is also a very accurate SMG, for when you do need to switch but don't want to get into close-quarters.

[JKoopman]

Felfenix wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

Maybe if you turned on your brain and aimed, or thought about what guns you used, you wouldn't run out of ammo? Complaining that the game punishes you for playing with your brain turned off is your problem. Using one gun and complaining it doesn't work out in ME2 is like complaining DAO isn't tactical because you have to min/max or micromanage your party.

"Turning on my brain and aiming" doesn't mean much when I'm facing down 8 Mercs and a YMIR mech at long range. It's pretty much a foregone conclussion that I'm going to run out of clips in my sniper rifle before that battle is over. So yes, I'm forced quite regularly to use a weapon that I don't like for no other reason than because I've run out of ammo through no fault of my own and the only spare clips are 100 yards downrange.

Now drop the attitude and calm the hell down.

OK, internet tough guy.

Go complain on the DAO forums that your naked unarmed warrior isn't as effective. "Why isn't my playstyle just as effective as anyone else's?" You want to be able to win the game easily regardless of what you do, and if casual difficulty isn't enough for you, then the problem is you. The weapons have an ammo limitation for a reason, to make you either take the risk or seeking out ammo / moving around the battlefield or making use of your full arsenal instead of equipping your sniper rifle and rolling your face on the keyboard. If you run out of ammo, it's your own fault for not playing tactically.

Internet tough guy, says the one throwing insults around anonymously on a message board.

Total straw man argument, again. If I hadn't been allowed to use a sniper rifle exclusively in ME1 and therefor set a character precedent as a sniper, I wouldn't feel the need to complain about that fact that my character now spends 90% of the game with an SMG.

To use your oh-so-clever example, that would be like if you were perfectly able to play through DA:O as a naked monk character who beats enemies to death with his fists and suddenly in DA:O2 they change it so that your character can no longer unequip weapons and you're required to wear platemail at all times. Kinda wrecks your character, doesn't it?

ME2 is a different game. They make improvements from game to game. Otherwise, ME1 would be the only game and they'd just keep releasing DLC for it. Instead of making up exaggerated BS like "ANYONE WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH ME THINKS ME2 IS PERFECT!" or "I HAVE TO SPEND 90% OF THE TIME WITH AN SMG!" and throwing out profanity while calling me out personality, you should try to argue valid points. Valid points, not made up exaggerations. That doesn't prove anything to anyone.

If you're spending "90%" of the time with an SMG, then you're both missing like crazy AND turtling up on the battlefield, which is just playing poorly and you should set the difficulty to casual. ME2 is taking a step in a more tactical direction in that in rewards weighing pros and cons, instead of just mindlessly doing one thing with no downside. Player have to either take risks for something they want (overcoming a limitation) or adapt to that limitation, playing to their arsenal's strengths and weaknesses.

If you want to use the sniper rifle almost exclusively, use the viper (it almost never runs out of ammo, even if you purposely skip most clips) and aim for heads. Unlike ME1, every weapon in ME2 has strengths and weaknesses, and aren't just linear upgrades. The Widow is the most impressive per single shot, but it's slow and has almost no clip capacity. Tactical is adapting to the situation using the strengths and weaknesses of what you have at your disposal, excercising options. It's not stubbornly trying something that doesn't work over and over again without thinking how you can tweak that "plan".

Are you legitimately insane? Where have I thrown out ANY profanity or called you out personally? You started attacking me and slingling insults with zero provocation and have only become increasingly hostile with each and every post.

Schneidend wrote...

Jkoop, I'd recommend using the Incisor or Viper if you're finding yourself low on sniper ammo. Also, using sniper shots on targets with Shields/Barriers can be a waste of ammo, especially if you miss the headshot.

The Locust is also a very accurate SMG, for when you do need to switch but don't want to get into close-quarters.

But I so love the Widow...

As for the Locust, perhaps. But then, the Locust is only available if you buy the $10 Kasumi's Stolen Memory DLC pack.

Modifié par JKoopman, 20 janvier 2011 - 05:47 .

[shnizzler93]

expanding panic wrote...

I personally like the ammo where you have to relaod better. It makes the game more realistic and I hated having to wait for my gun to cool down because it overheated. I may run out of ammo in one gun but I have only once ran out of ammo in all my guns. That was on Horizion and both my squad mated died. So I had to hide in a building. (No one would walk up the stairs) So then I had to use my biotic powers. In the original Mass Effect I never used my sniper or shot gun because after 2 shots it was over heated and I had to run if I was using my shot gun or I had to wait for me to use my Sniper. There was no real point. With Mass Effect 2 all you have to do it re-load. It's faster and for me I chose speed over power all day everyday. Anyone agree with me?  

Because it gives people something to talk about. Much of the internet believes it is inherently easier to complain about something than just accept, which is hilariously ironic. The apparently cool thing in games nowadays is to anticicate how awesome a sequel might be, get it, and automatically complain about the changes.

Let's face it. No developer is going to release the exact same game and slap a number 2 on the box. They just won't (and no, Call of Duty does not count. There have been plenty of changes throughout the games). If they do so, people will complain that they were lazy and just did a rehash. This, in effect, is the same thing that will happen if they change too much.

Honestly, I couldn't care less which method of ammo consumption they used. Both the infinite heat sinks and 'regular' ammo counter both served their purposes, each to a different degree. I never ran out of ammo on Insanity in ME2 because there was always some extra lying around on the battlefield. This involved actually moving around (I know! a shocker!).

/post

[Schneidend]

JKoopman wrote...

But I so love the Widow...

As for the Locust, perhaps. But then, the Locust is only available if you buy the $10 Kasumi's Stolen Memory DLC pack.

The Widow is nice, but it's overkill. You're one-shotting things, certainly, but using comparatively many times more ammo. The Viper and Incisor are a lot more efficient, especially for the lesser enemies.

Kasumi's totally worth it. She's a fun character, and mechanically she saves you a lot of ammo by having the single most damaging power in the game, the Shadow Strike.

[Felfenix]

JKoopman wrote...

Are you legitimately insane? Where have I thrown out ANY profanity or called you out personally? You started attacking me and slingling insults with zero provocation and have only become increasingly hostile with each and every post.

You haven't made one post without something like

JKoopman wrote...
Now drop the attitude and calm the hell down.

anytime someone argues againt one or your sweeping exaggerations like "Anyone who disagrees thinks ME2 is perfect." or "I HAVE to use the SMG 90% of the time."

If you're not going to discuss any actual points and do nothing but personally attack me and others because you're upset you want to use the low ammo rifle instead of the high ammo rifle, take it to PMs or grow up.

I've tried helping you and offering suggestions to address your problems, as well as addressed your points. You insist on being angry and stubborn, not even trying to have a discussion anymore. Set the game on casual, don't spray, and use an ammo efficient sniper rifle. Problem solved. It's clear you're just intent on being an angry, unhappy person though.

NewMessageN00b wrote...

@Felfenix
What you are saying about tactics there makes little sense to me in a game that's supposed
to be more so a story. I'd agree with you if it was CoD or similar games that are about taking the risk and conserving resources and all. But for ME it feels redundant.

I've got enough tactics and risks at work to even care about this crap in a game that I bought for its story
and to do careless yet rewarding decisions rather than careful planning. (Seriously, applying tactics in reading a story?)

It's the whole point of it for me, and seems like for these other people too.

ME is not just a pick your adventure book or movie though. It's a story-based game. Story and gameplay are both important and complement each other. A videogame is probably the wrong place to look for JUST a story if you don't want any game at all, but you can always set the game on casual. There are also ME books and comics out there. Dragon Age is hardly Call of Duty, but tactical gameplay is extremely important in it, too, and many argue it's vital for an RPG to have tactical gameplay, or at least the option. That's why there are difficulty settings. You can do whatever you want on casual and be fine.

Modifié par Felfenix, 20 janvier 2011 - 06:05 .

[JKoopman]

Felfenix wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Are you legitimately insane? Where have I thrown out ANY profanity or called you out personally? You started attacking me and slingling insults with zero provocation and have only become increasingly hostile with each and every post.

You haven't made one post without something like

JKoopman wrote...
Now drop the attitude and calm the hell down.

anytime someone argues againt one or your sweeping exaggerations like "Anyone who disagrees thinks ME2 is perfect." or "I HAVE to use the SMG 90% of the time."

If you're not going to discuss any actual points and do nothing but personally attack me and others because you're upset you want to use the low ammo rifle instead of the high ammo rifle, take it to PMs or grow up.

I've tried helping you and offering suggestions to address your problems, as well as addressed your points. You insist on being angry and stubborn, not even trying to have a discussion anymore. Set the game on casual, don't spray, and use an ammo efficient sniper rifle. Problem solved. It's clear you're just intent on being an angry, unhappy person though.

Nice. Why don't we post the whole thing though?

JKoopman wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

Maybe if you turned on your brain and aimed, or thought about what guns you used, you wouldn't run out of ammo? Complaining that the game punishes you for playing with your brain turned off is your problem. Using one gun and complaining it doesn't work out in ME2 is like complaining DAO isn't tactical because you have to min/max or micromanage your party.

"Turning on my brain and aiming" doesn't mean much when I'm facing down 8 Mercs and a YMIR mech at long range. It's pretty much a foregone conclussion that I'm going to run out of clips in my sniper rifle before that battle is over, especially on Hardcore or Insanity. So yes, I'm forced quite regularly to use a weapon that I don't like for no other reason than because I've run out of ammo through no fault of my own and the only spare clips are 100 yards downrange.

Now drop the attitude and calm the hell down.

So I guess my comment to drop the attitude and calm down retroactively caused you to insult me by calling me brainless in the prior post I was quoting? How exactly does that work? For that matter, lets throw in all the insults you've tossed my way across the forum, from calling me pathetic and friendless in the Co-op available? thread completely unprovoked, to calling me a laughably unsuccessful writer of bad fan-fiction in the Mass Effect 2: Retcons, Inconsistencies and Story Segregation thread also completely unprovoked.

Then you accuse me of being profane when there is not ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of profanity on my part in this or either of the other threads I linked to (even though I can certainly think of a few choice words right about now), and claim that I've done nothing but throw an angry tantrum and personally attack you? And, perhaps most ironic, you try to claim that you've done nothing but attempt to help, and I've just stubbornly refused to heed your words of advice? What help and advice have you given? All you've done is sling mud like a pre-schooler and claim that everything I say is BS and I should GTFO.

Seriously, seek psychiatric help.

I'm done with you.

Modifié par JKoopman, 20 janvier 2011 - 06:36 .

[Giantdeathrobot]

 Ammo discussions are new and exciting <_<. Ah well, internet, internet never changes.

For the record, I think the clip system, while an embarassing retcon, works far better. Even if you somehow forget the unbalanced mod/abilities that made the heat mechanic redundant, waiting in cover while the gun slowly dissipates heat broke the flow of the combat (the combat also had loads of other issues which are not to be discussed here, but still exist). Switching to another weapon was pointless since, if your gun could actually overheat, you were probably at lower levels and only has proficiencies in one weapon style.

And anyway, what is the difference between ammo and heat? From my experience, heat must makes you sit on your ass longer, which is clearly bad in a shooter like Mass Effect where combat needs to be fast-paced to be fun, unlike traditionnal RPGs or games like Civilization that certainly play better when the action happens more slowly.

It's just a limitation of the shooter genre; sitting in cover is boring. Clips make sitting in cover less long, and so are less boring, and so are better. There is nothing more to it, no conspiracy from evil shooter fans to crush the pure-hearted hardcore RPG fans under their nasty casual player boots, no attempts at Bioware to 'dumb down' their games to appeal to 'the most common denominator' (damn I hate these terms). 

Could a hybrid system work? I think not. If you want to test, there's a mod out there for the PC that makes you unable to manually reload but regenerates ammo, and I found it only made the game more tedious. So while I have issues with the clip system, it ultimately works better than overheating and is a good change in my books.

EDIT: Bah, why did I bother? 'Seek psychiatric help'? Seriously?

Modifié par Giantdeathrobot, 20 janvier 2011 - 06:30 .

[Felfenix]

JKoopman wrote...

So I guess my comment to drop the attitude and calm down retroactively caused you to insult me by calling me brainless in the prior post I was quoting? How exactly does that work? For that matter, lets throw in all the insults you've tossed my way across the forum, from calling me pathetic and friendless in the Co-op%20available?]http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/5750364/3#5778533]Co-op available? thread completely unprovoked, to calling me a laughably unsuccessful writer of bad fan-fiction in the Mass Effect 2: Retcons, Inconsistencies and Story Segregation thread also completely unprovoked.

Not to mention that you accuse me of being profane when there is not ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of profanity on my part in this or either of the other threads I linked to (even though I can certainly think of a few choice words, right about now), and claim that I've done nothing but throw an angry tantrum and personally attack you? And then you try to claim that you've done nothing but attempt to help, and I've just stubbornly refused to heed your words of advice? What help and advice have you given? All you've done is sling mud like a pre-schooler and claim that everything I say is BS.

Seriously, seek psychiatric help.

I'm done with you.

Wow, that isn't raging. A perfect exampel of a calm post and it's definitely on topic and discussing the points of the thread. No insults directed at me whatsoever. Again, take it to PMs or grow up if you're going to rage post. If your problem is wanting to exclusively use the sniper rifle but keep running out of ammo, then the solution is to use an ammo efficient sniper rifle (such as the viper), to avoid missing or wasted shots (go for headshots and 100% accuracy), and set the game on casual. That WILL solve your issue.

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

 Ammo discussions are new and exciting [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png[/smilie]. Ah well, internet, internet never changes.

For the record, I think the clip system, while an embarassing retcon, works
far better. Even if you somehow forget the unbalanced mod/abilities that made the heat mechanic redundant, waiting in cover while the gun slowly dissipates heat broke the flow of the combat (the combat also had
loads of other issues which are not to be discussed here, but still exist). Switching to another weapon was pointless since, if your gun could actually overheat, you were probably at lower levels and only has proficiencies in one weapon style.

And anyway, what is the difference between ammo and heat? From my experience, heat must makes
you sit on your ass longer, which is clearly bad in a shooter like Mass Effect where combat needs to be fast-paced to be fun, unlike traditionnal RPGs or games like Civilization that certainly play better when the action happens more slowly.

It's just a limitation of the shooter genre; sitting in cover is boring. Clips make sitting in
cover less long, and so are less boring, and so are better. There is nothing more to it, no conspiracy from evil shooter fans to crush the pure-hearted hardcore RPG fans under their nasty casual player boots, no
attempts at Bioware to 'dumb down' their games to appeal to 'the most common denominator' (damn I hate these terms). 

Could a hybrid system work? I think not. If you want to test, there's a mod out there for the PC that makes you unable to manually reload but regenerates ammo, and I found it only made the game more tedious. So while I have issues with the clip system, it ultimately works better than overheating and is a good change in my books.

Those are the reasons the devs went with the ammo system. If you look in the game files, they actually did test alternatives to clips, but they didn't solve the problems they sought to address. Clips did exactly what the devs wanted with the gameplay, as you pointed out.

NewMessageN00b wrote...

@Felfenix
What you are saying about tactics there makes little sense to me in a game that's supposed to be more so a story. I'd agree with you if it was CoD or similar games that are about taking the risk and conserving resources and all. But for ME it feels redundant.

I've got enough tactics and risks at work to even care about this crap in a game that I bought for its story and to do careless yet rewarding decisions rather than careful planning. (Seriously, applying tactics in reading a story?)


It's the whole point of it for me, and seems like for these other people too.

I just want to add that it's a common complaint that ME2's game mechanics "dumb down" the gameplay. I'm simply refuting that point. If someone doesn't like added levels of gameplay though, that's a whole different issue.

Modifié par Felfenix, 20 janvier 2011 - 06:37 .

[Praetor Knight]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

For the record, I think the clip system, while an embarassing retcon, works far better.

I'd just like to ask how there is an embarrassing retcon with Thermal Clips?

ME2 weapons still use heat sinks, and Thermal Clips allow the user to speed load more heat sinks into the weapons instead of waiting for a cool down.



***************************
Going by the wiki on retcon, Thermal Clips might be considered an additive retcon, which IMHO is not embarrassing and fits with upgrading weapons from ME to ME2.

Either way the retcon concept is thrown around too easily IMHO; and at least for me, carries a negative connotation in most circumstances I've seen it used.

[Felfenix]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

For the record, I think the clip system, while an embarassing retcon, works far better.

I'd just like to ask how there is an embarrassing retcon with Thermal Clips?

ME2 weapons still use heat sinks, and Thermal Clips allow the user to speed load more heat sinks into the weapons instead of waiting for a cool down.



***************************
Going by the wiki on retcon, Thermal Clips might be considered an additive retcon, which IMHO is not embarrassing and fits with upgrading weapons from ME to ME2.

Either way the retcon concept is thrown around too easily IMHO; and at least for me, carries a negative connotation in most circumstances I've seen it used.

I don't think the actual idea of heat sinks is a retcon, as much as it's progress in the universe. New inventions and innovations come about all the time. The ME universe would be pretty boring if it were completely static and unchanging.

However, the issue where it "hurts the story" with some people seems to be with the plot holes introduced because of game mechanics. Since Shepard is using a clip system, you need to have access to clips on every mission. On Jacob's loyalty mission, you visit a planet where the inhabitants were stranded pre-heat clip invention, or so it seems at least, yet there are clips and modern mechs.

Another poster suggested an easy explanation for this though in that perhaps you aren't literally picking up clips off the ground, but it's representative of your party using their omnitools to break down materials you would have normally found, and are creating the thermal clips, since omnitools/omnigel are capable of things like that. The reason you pick up clips instead of picking up garbage, turning it to omnigel, and then crafting ammo, all in the middle of the battlefield, is for gameplay reasons.

[Lotion Soronarr]

NewMessageN00b wrote...

@Felfenix
What you are saying about tactics there makes little sense to me in a game that's supposed to be more so a story. I'd agree with you if it was CoD or similar games that are about taking the risk and conserving resources and all. But for ME it feels redundant.

I've got enough tactics and risks at work to even care about this crap in a game that I bought for its story and to do careless yet rewarding decisions rather than careful planning. (Seriously, applying tactics in reading a story?)


It's the whole point of it for me, and seems like for these other people too.

In other words, you don't want to think while playing a game, dumb down the game?

[Destructo-Bot]

expanding panic wrote...

Destructo-Bot wrote...


Actually the Vangaurd's Charge Ability is the new Immunity. As long as you keep spamming charge, you don't die. I've done three run throughs with a Vangaurd on Insanity so I do have experience with it. On any level less than insanity you can charge into a group and you are basically invincible the entire time.

When you say charge into a group, how big is the group your charging into? Because I played as the vangaurd a few times (It's my favorite class.) and if I go charging into a group more then 3 I die. Even whem I use champion and Charge both being maxed out. 

Charge, melee charged target, shoot different target, melee 1st target again, shoot another target, use squad's abilities.... charge again, repeat. If you are playing on normal you can charge into any size group you like. Hardcore and insanity have some situations that will kill you if you charge a group, but you can glide through the collector base vent mission like it's not there.

Modifié par Destructo-Bot, 20 janvier 2011 - 11:09 .

[Destructo-Bot]

NewMessageN00b wrote...

Like, dunno... because we've got 6 CoD's and hundreds of other games where you need to just... reload? I thought this got old right after Quake 3, but I guess the elegance in how it was dealt with in ME1 story-wise wasn't enough for you. The point was certainly not to manage your heat, but to progress and get that gun that's so awesome that doesn't overheat. After that you can lay back and go through the story in a calm matter and see what you missed, this being a nice accomplishment and sci-fi feel all the way every day. In ME2 it all feels like a chore. Just like the crazy hills for the Mako or lack of grouping in inventory management in ME1.

Quake3 doesn't have reloads

But it does have incredibly powerful and accurate weapons (railgun, lightning gun, shotgun). You must be situationally aware and have good tactics to make it through a fight with someone who has better overall accuracy than you. Non-CPM versions don't have fast weapon switch, so there is a significant delay between changing weapons.

[Lumikki]

I ques ammo's are battle between rush and tactical players. People who like to rush with guns blazing in battle feal, don't like limiting ammos, because it restrict they ability do action. How ever, for tactial player ammos create more tactical situation, when player need to consider also use of ammos and what weapons to use. It's about thinking more before action. Is picking up clips from ground stupid? Yeah, it's little annoying and even not so good for lore. How ever, it's good for tactial gameplay. It improves feeling of guns and offer something more to think in combat.

I think the problem here isn't lore, because lore is allways defined AFTER gameplay. Problem is conflicted needs between tactial and rush player. Now someone could ask what kind of player you are? In simple way asked, it could be identify by few thing. Do you use allways same weapon and want to rush in more close combat to fight in battle field. That's rush player. Tactical player thinks more before action. Like what weapon to use here, do I have enough ammos, where is best cover to be and so on..

Now what this has to do with this subject. If we would have no ammo limits, we force most players more in rush gameplay type. If we have ammo limits we force more player in tactial gamelay. It's one or other, there is no comprimize to please both side.

I my self belong to more in tactical gameplay, because even how I don't like to pick clips from ground, I think they actually improve my combat gameplay with weapons alot. Reload guns give more gun like feeling for guns. Limited ammos, force me to think more what weapons to use and keep track of ammos. Now if the limit would not be there and with unlimited ammos. Hole combat would be changed. It would make me use just one most efficient and best weapon all the time and I could rush more in battle field, because no worries about ammos. I would be annoyed how I have to take these breaks all the time because lore based overheat.

Now what else happens?

Without limited ammos, we can't have so extreme weapons, because we would have heat system. It cause weapons work more in mean values, than burst value. You may not yet know what I talk about, but let me explain. Because ammo's are limiting sertain type of weapons, developers can make those weapons feel more different. Like have higher damage and faster sniper rifle, because also amount of ammo's is limiting players ability shoot. So, these single shot weapons gets more burst damage, what they can't get so much with unlimited ammo system. Because it's one less system affecting players ability shoot. Developers would be forced to more medium with weapons.

In simple way sayed, little bit "negative" in something can improve something else and make the gameplay in general better in hole picture. It does hurt rush players gameplay, but I think modern warfare isn't rush playing. It belong to medival age gameplay, where you go with sword in close combat. Modern warfare is more about cover and tactical from long range.

So, it's not hard to ques, why I support termal clips. Not because they make lore better, because they don't, but because they make weapon combat in games alot more modern warfare like, what feels better. What's the point have good story and lore, if the gameplay sucks. Unability accept that lore has been little changed, should no be excuse for bad weapon gameplay. Lore should not define gameplay, it's other way around, from gameplay comes lore, what explains gameplay from lore perspective.

If I want just good story, best way to get it is read a book. If I'm too lazy to read to book, then I can watch movie. How ever, If I want be active and play, I need good gameplay. If game also has good lore and story, that's good too, but without good gameplay, it's never good game.

Modifié par Lumikki, 20 janvier 2011 - 02:29 .

[SalsaDMA]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

For the record, I think the clip system, while an embarassing retcon, works far better.

I'd just like to ask how there is an embarrassing retcon with Thermal Clips?

ME2 weapons still use heat sinks, and Thermal Clips allow the user to speed load more heat sinks into the weapons instead of waiting for a cool down.



***************************
Going by the wiki on retcon, Thermal Clips might be considered an additive retcon, which IMHO is not embarrassing and fits with upgrading weapons from ME to ME2.

Either way the retcon concept is thrown around too easily IMHO; and at least for me, carries a negative connotation in most circumstances I've seen it used.

It's not a retcon, no, and most people use the word wrong regarding ME2 'ammo'.

Q&A dropped the ball with ME2, though, letting too many inconsistencies in the story slip through. The people claiming a 'retcon' are doing so from a mistaken asumption that the plotholes/inconsistencies are 'canon' and everything else is an error. That, despite the devs have even said on these very same boards why things are like they are, and what the 'real' canon is (ie. thermal clips are a an evolution of the heat-sink mechanics of weapons in the timeframe of the series).

In "star wars" and "Lord of the rings" people laugh about the plotholes and inconsistencies that slipped through Q&A, but recongize them as such. Yet for some reason some people prefer asuming the same type of plotholes and inconsistencies are 'the truth' and the rest of the lore are wrong or retconned in the "Mass Effect" series, purely because they don't like the evolution of the canon lore. It boggles the mind, sometimes.

[Astalder]

Lore aside, the gameplay is superior with thermal clips... it's really that simple IMO.  Adding thermal clips was a gameplay improvement just as necessary as improvements to the UI.

[mate209]

wtf?



overheating was terrible, this way, since ammo capacity is low, I have to change through weapons often and that's good

[Tony Gunslinger]

After 8 pages of trolling and cheap campaigning tactics with no subtance, I have yet seen one anti-thermal clip person giving an example of how it would be better in actual gameplay. Consider the Widow under ME1's system: game designers would want to keep it as a one-shot gun, therefore if you shoot it twice in a row too fast, it will overheat and you'll get (for instance) an 8 second cooldown penality. In actual game play, the Widow would have unlimited ammo and you never need to use anything else. How is that a better system than limited ammo? How does that balance the game where you can cheese out even more with the Infiltrator? How would weapons with different firing rates, different recoil and accuracy penalities, different DPS, be affected? Because if you what the hell you're talking about. then you would know that unlimited ammo destorys parity with the weapons in this game. Do you even know why ME1 guns were basically the exact same gun but with different arbitrary stats like Accuracy Damage and Overheat that you can mod with upgrades? It's because they CAN'T make different types of guns when you have unlimited ammo. All it does is make one gun in each category the best and 99% of other guns useless in the end. With the exception of a few, there is no "best gun" in ME2, all weapons have their strengths and weaknesses precisely because of limited ammo. If you don't think so, then show us an actual gameplay example of how unlimited ammo would work, instead of spamming the usual RPG vs shooter talking points.

Modifié par Tony Gunslinger, 20 janvier 2011 - 02:22 .

[PoisonTea]

Thermal Clip system is complete ****.

[Praetor Knight]

PoisonTea wrote...

Thermal Clip system is complete PTAS .

or CPTAS

So, the Thermal Clip system is a complete package of totally awesome sauce!

[Ahglock]

Tony Gunslinger wrote...

After 8 pages of trolling and cheap campaigning tactics with no subtance, I have yet seen one anti-thermal clip person giving an example of how it would be better in actual gameplay. Consider the Widow under ME1's system: game designers would want to keep it as a one-shot gun, therefore if you shoot it twice in a row too fast, it will overheat and you'll get (for instance) an 8 second cooldown penality. In actual game play, the Widow would have unlimited ammo and you never need to use anything else. How is that a better system than limited ammo? How does that balance the game where you can cheese out even more with the Infiltrator? How would weapons with different firing rates, different recoil and accuracy penalities, different DPS, be affected? Because if you what the hell you're talking about. then you would know that unlimited ammo destorys parity with the weapons in this game. Do you even know why ME1 guns were basically the exact same gun but with different arbitrary stats like Accuracy Damage and Overheat that you can mod with upgrades? It's because they CAN'T make different types of guns when you have unlimited ammo. All it does is make one gun in each category the best and 99% of other guns useless in the end. With the exception of a few, there is no "best gun" in ME2, all weapons have their strengths and weaknesses precisely because of limited ammo. If you don't think so, then show us an actual gameplay example of how unlimited ammo would work, instead of spamming the usual RPG vs shooter talking points.

I'm curious outside the dedicated sniper.  Do you or does anyone else ever actually run out of ammo in this game?  I never have, so exactly how did it effect or add to my gameplay?  You and all the pro-thermal clip crowds have never answered this.  If something never comes up, how does it make your game play better.  Quick answer is that it doesn't, it did nothing for game play. 
The one exception might be the dedicated sniper and then likely only the dedicated soldier sniper, because the infiltrator can sneak up to gather heat sinks in the field.  And since ammo is never an issue your entire argument about not being bale to make different guns in an unlimited ammo system is moot.  Unlimited and effectively unlimited because you never run out are the same damn thing. 
The reason why guns are so well balanced in ME2 has nothing to do with total ammo, but ammo per clip, rate of fire, and base dps differences so end DPS is roughly the same.  It is not ammo until you run out that is the balancer in ME2 but ammo until you need to reload, which pretty much mirrors a heat system. 

[JKoopman]

Ahglock wrote...

Tony Gunslinger wrote...

After 8 pages of trolling and cheap campaigning tactics with no subtance, I have yet seen one anti-thermal clip person giving an example of how it would be better in actual gameplay. Consider the Widow under ME1's system: game designers would want to keep it as a one-shot gun, therefore if you shoot it twice in a row too fast, it will overheat and you'll get (for instance) an 8 second cooldown penality. In actual game play, the Widow would have unlimited ammo and you never need to use anything else. How is that a better system than limited ammo? How does that balance the game where you can cheese out even more with the Infiltrator? How would weapons with different firing rates, different recoil and accuracy penalities, different DPS, be affected? Because if you what the hell you're talking about. then you would know that unlimited ammo destorys parity with the weapons in this game. Do you even know why ME1 guns were basically the exact same gun but with different arbitrary stats like Accuracy Damage and Overheat that you can mod with upgrades? It's because they CAN'T make different types of guns when you have unlimited ammo. All it does is make one gun in each category the best and 99% of other guns useless in the end. With the exception of a few, there is no "best gun" in ME2, all weapons have their strengths and weaknesses precisely because of limited ammo. If you don't think so, then show us an actual gameplay example of how unlimited ammo would work, instead of spamming the usual RPG vs shooter talking points.

I'm curious outside the dedicated sniper.  Do you or does anyone else ever actually run out of ammo in this game?  I never have, so exactly how did it effect or add to my gameplay?  You and all the pro-thermal clip crowds have never answered this.  If something never comes up, how does it make your game play better.  Quick answer is that it doesn't, it did nothing for game play. 
The one exception might be the dedicated sniper and then likely only the dedicated soldier sniper, because the infiltrator can sneak up to gather heat sinks in the field.  And since ammo is never an issue your entire argument about not being bale to make different guns in an unlimited ammo system is moot.  Unlimited and effectively unlimited because you never run out are the same damn thing. 
The reason why guns are so well balanced in ME2 has nothing to do with total ammo, but ammo per clip, rate of fire, and base dps differences so end DPS is roughly the same.  It is not ammo until you run out that is the balancer in ME2 but ammo until you need to reload, which pretty much mirrors a heat system. 

Whenever you argue that you run out of ammo too easily for your preferred weapon, the response is "I never ran out of ammo once for any of my weapons, even on Insanity. Use your brain and learn to shoot." Whenever you argue that a cooldown mechanic was every bit as "tactical" as an ammo mechanic, the response is "Unlimited ammo makes the game too easy and you never have to switch weapons."

You can't argue a point if your opponent keeps changing the facts to suit their position.

Modifié par JKoopman, 20 janvier 2011 - 05:46 .