95 réponses à ce sujet

[skan5]

Before I say anything, I'd just like to say that this is a great OP and overall thread, and I think covers most of the major issues with the game.

Lumikki wrote...
While overheat system or hybrid looks good in paper and lore point. There is little problems in it. Mostly it promote more open area close combat or stand still combat. Meaning if you aren't strong enough to come out of cover, it promote use same best weapon from behind same safe cover combat. Other possibilitity is that combat is too much gear based what means covers aren't needed and then it's open area combat, because you ability do damage and take damage (armors) is bigger than enemies. So, if we look termal clip based combat, it was more like avoid damage, stay in cover, but the picking clips forced player out from cover. Also there wasn't enough gear based gameplay to stay long in open. So, termal clip based combat feeled more like modern warfare (avoid damage), while overheat system was more like middle age combat (high defence). Point is that forcing player out of cover to pick clips and not allow to have higher enough of defence to stay open areas long, is what made the combat work better and be more modern warfare like. 

While I completely agree that the ability to "tank" should be kept as limited as possible, I disagree on some parts of this and I definitely lean on the OP's side (which again btw OP, great post!). For me, at least, it was very rare that I ever left cover inside of combat for the sake of ammo. Usually it was because I was sick of the respawning enemies in some areas (Zaeed's mission -.-) and wanted to finish them quicker.  Ammo did nothing for me, but knowing that I can't tank the damage like in the later parts of ME1 made it feel more "modern," as you put it.

When you look at it, a large chunk of the enemies in ME2 don't really encourage you to move. Occasionally you get some of the brave grunts that go at you, but a large portion of them are content just chilling behind a box. The armed ones that DO love to charge, don't even run; they WALK towards you. This is only made worse by the fact that many of them don't have any weapons that can go around cover (like hand grenades, for example), and the fact that their defenses and health do not recharge.

I think the most intense fights are the ones that combined the basic grunts and husks/varren, as now you have to deal with both enemies that have no issue in running at you and incomming enemy fire.

Something else I recommend, which is now a staple I do whenever I have to reinstall ME2, is give enemy shields and barriers the ability to recharge once more. It changes a lot of things, I think, since it makes you push harder if you ever plan on finishing some of the encounters.

Regardless of what they choose to do, though, I won't complain much. I won't complain at all if they let us edit the ini easier so we can edit these things in an easier manner >

Lumikki wrote...
If anyone feels that they are force to be either full Paragon or Renegade because game system, these players are METAGAMERS. That is FACT. Roleplaying is limited by THREE choises in right side of dialogs, paragon, neutral and renegade.

I completely and utterly agree, despite half my Shepards being mixed in different ratios. I accept that my Shepards, given their nature to be more neutral, may not be able to come up with the things a pure good guy or renegade would do, and thus accept the consequences. 

[stonbw1]

Nice to see civil conversation. When it comes to making video games, though, what is the realistic time frame in which major changes (e.g. story, morality system) can be made to include in the final game? I recall one developer saying he was playing a version of ME3 already. I'd assume that once a game gets developed where it is playable, a major rehaul would be too costly to implement. Just curious, but I am grateful for BW seeking insight from their biggest fans.

[Capeo]

Great OP. I pretty much agree with everything you said. My main points, personally, would be:



Renegade/Paragon: poorly implemented. It left to little room to really create the Shepard you wanted. It would be far more interesting if your squad mates had an approval meter and your actions and conversations effected their loyalty. Hell, you could use the DA:O system and I'd be fine with that.



Cover system/Combat: Needs to be refined. It's not yet on par with the best TPSs. Vaulting over cover is too clunky. Transitioning from cover to cover is not smooth at all. Look at Uncharted 2 to see what I mean. One button allows you to smoothly move around much more easily. It's hard to feel in control of the battle when you have to keep standing straight up and run over to boxes ten feet away. Too often you hit a weird angle and get odd results. A big part in this? You should be able switch which shoulder you are looking over. You have R3 and L3 doing the same thing. Use one of them for that. Also, free up O for another mappable power. Getting in, out, and sliding into nearby cover should all be one button.



Armor: Different grades of armor would be great. At least light and heavy. And helmets should not be in cut scenes. I don't care about the lack of realism in that. I want to see my Shep talk. And, while I'm not as bothered as much as many others about squad mates outfits, I wouldn't mind them wearing armor too.



General: Please, please, if we have to assemble a new squad again, please incorporate those missions into the main story line not just a "collect a team then get the Reapers" type configuration. Ideally, skip that and let us have squad members from 2. Except Liara. She has to be on my squad. Liara leads me to my last point. LotSB is the best single mission, by a long shot, in ME2. Keep doing that. It's pacing is fantastic. Its cutscenes create momentum and build characters. It's vehicle scene is short, sweet, and beautifully integrated into the mission. The battles have multiple flanks that keep changing as opposed to being a corridor shooter. And, lastly, both boss fights are great and the denouement has emotional resonance. You feel like you earned the bit quiet time after. Just stick with that formula and ME3 will be brilliant.

[morrie23]

Great post OP, agree with everything you said.



I'd personally like to see the return of weapon mods, it would be great to build customised versions of each gun. Maybe the Normandy can have a 'Weapons Workbench' were you can configure multiple versions of each gun (including different colour schemes?), save the configuration and then be able to pick them on the weapon load out screen. It would also mean weapon mods could be something extra to loot or purchase. It would be great if when you find or buy a better version of say Frictionless Materials, it is automatically applied to all the gun configurations with that mod installed, no need to go through them all and upgrade manually!

[Capeo]

Lol. I was just playing and it made me come back to bring up a couple more things.



Combat related: The red selection box around foes should disappear the second they are dead. So instead of pouring three extra rounds into a corpse that hasn't fallen over yet you know they're dead. Also, I'd love to be able to control my squadmates tactics more. I mean, it doesn't have to be the multiple if/then statements of DA:O (although if you want to do that I wouldn't complain) but it would be good if we could individually choose how aggressive they, range they take, etc. Lastly, there needs to be a sensitivity slider. Right now there is only three settings and even the fastest is a little slower than I'd normally pick in a shooter.



General: Please, have some NPCs walking around hub worlds and in the Normandy. Everything feels so static and dead in the places that should feel most alive.

[wizardryforever]

Capeo wrote...

General: Please, have some NPCs walking around hub worlds and in the Normandy. Everything feels so static and dead in the places that should feel most alive.

Well, yeah, but you have to remember that there is quite a lot of NPC conversations that you overhear on hub worlds (and on the Normandy, just to a lesser extent).  I feel that this helps them seem alive more than repetitive walking back and forth.  In ME1, there was a lot of NPC walking going on, but it sometimes became transparent.  Walking NPCs are immersive, NPCs walking back and forth for no discernable reason is not immersive.  Gotta watch out for that.  I agree that there should be more motion on hub worlds, but I still think that it's secondary to dialogue.

[Terror_K]

Lumikki wrote...

beefcake 85 wrote...

Well put OP, and also well done to Terror_K.  They have put down how I feel about ME2, I just want to expand on something Terror wrote:

Terror_K wrote...

-Paragon/Renegade system. 
The problem too is that the self-feeding nature limited roleplaying, ultimately forcing you to be pretty much either full on Paragon or Renegade and without letting you truly explore the grey in-between. Especially if you wanted to be able to succeed at some of the bigger Charm/Intimidate moments such as in Miranda and Jack's confrontation and being able to choose Morinth or not, etc. It basically forced players to constantly go for one path just so they could pull off these dialogue choices. Something needs to be done to split the ability to choose away from the meter itself, whether it be going back to having two separate skills or just having one "Persuade" style skill.

I think giving Shepard a skill branch for persuade would be the best way to encourage your own type of play (going into that grey area).  So, if you want to be your enemies worse nightmare but your friends best mate you can.  At the moment, if you try to do both, you end up with neither paragon or renegade points high enough to succeed in the pivitol points of the game, Tali / Legion, Mairanda / Jack.  Of course, talent points would have to be looked at, depending of course, on how Bioware handle skill trees etc. But those who invest in persuade skill branch, will be awarded more conversation choices and better discounts at stores.

If anyone feels that they are force to be either full Paragon or Renegade because game system, these players are METAGAMERS. That is FACT. Roleplaying is limited by THREE choises in right side of dialogs, paragon, neutral and renegade.

No, and we've been over this before, Lumikki. A person's success as being able to persuade somebody one way or the other should be determined by their skill with words, and not whether they've saved or killed X amount of babies prior to reaching that point.

While it is true that having a more lenient system could be abused by meta-gamers, it's not a guarantee and not everybody who wants more freedom here is a metagamer doing it solely to get the best outcome. Many of us want it because it's the outcome or choice that would best suit our character's concept.

For example, if a player wants their Shepard to be largely Paragon, but have a particular distaste and hate for batarians, then they shouldn't be forced to perform a whole bunch of Renegade actions and screw up the nature of their character just so they can pull off the Intimidate option on a batarian later on.

As it stands the game basically forces you to choose one path or another to be fully successful, which in a way is forcing you to metagame more than a system that were to give you a bit more freedom. In a game that's supposed to be about choice and making the story personal to you, and is also supposed to be about the consequences of your actions, it's ironic and counterproductive to limit players as the ME2 Paragon/Renegade system does. All it results in is almost every Paragon player with the same choices as every other Paragon player out there, with only a few small variations such as gender and love interest.

[Gleym]

Terror, you should know better than to expect Lumikki to sway on this matter by now. Best to just pay it no heed.

[Lumikki]

Terror_K wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

If anyone feels that they are force to be either full Paragon or Renegade because game system, these players are METAGAMERS. That is FACT. Roleplaying is limited by THREE choises in right side of dialogs, paragon, neutral and renegade.

No, and we've been over this before, Lumikki. A person's success as being able to persuade somebody one way or the other should be determined by their skill with words, and not whether they've saved or killed X amount of babies prior to reaching that point.

While it is true that having a more lenient system could be abused by meta-gamers, it's not a guarantee and not everybody who wants more freedom here is a metagamer doing it solely to get the best outcome. Many of us want it because it's the outcome or choice that would best suit our character's concept.

For example, if a player wants their Shepard to be largely Paragon, but have a particular distaste and hate for batarians, then they shouldn't be forced to perform a whole bunch of Renegade actions and screw up the nature of their character just so they can pull off the Intimidate option on a batarian later on.

As it stands the game basically forces you to choose one path or another to be fully successful, which in a way is forcing you to metagame more than a system that were to give you a bit more freedom. In a game that's supposed to be about choice and making the story personal to you, and is also supposed to be about the consequences of your actions, it's ironic and counterproductive to limit players as the ME2 Paragon/Renegade system does. All it results in is almost every Paragon player with the same choices as every other Paragon player out there, with only a few small variations such as gender and love interest.

Yes the system lures you into paragon or renegade path, if you are metagamer. It has no affect to real roleplayer, because real roleplayer would complain the right side of dialog choises to be too limited. Don't get wrong, I don't disagree much with you what you say here, but you and I know both I wasn't talking about this. So, yes, persuation opens choises, where moral restrics, because that is they nature.

[Funker Shepard]

habitat 67 wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...
However, I would like to add my two cents by stating my desire for a return to the classic "sci-fi" music of ME1. If ME2 had the same basic music as ME1 the atmosphere would have improved tenfold in my eyes (yes, the music is that important to me).

The music is the one thing I miss more than anything.

Yes, that too. The classic synth/orchestral fusion worked really well in ME1, I think as close as we got to it was with the N7 Mission music that shows up as part of "Testing Memories" in the ME2 Combat soundtrack - and the rest of that track represents what I had in mind pretty well.

The combat music from Eden Prime, Feros, Ilos, and  even Therum were all excellent (and I mean, some of the best score-type music I have ever heard, no matter on which medium). The ambient stuff... all brilliant. If I could change one thing about ME2, it would definitely be to have the score more in line with the first one. (The second one would be to replace the Hammerhead levels with Mako levels from the first one - prefereably mission levels, but I'd even take the Uncharted ones over what we got, but I digress...). Here's to getting the electronic back in.

[Sique Foque]

Great OP, I agree with everything! We need more of these calm discussions!

Do have to read the whole thread still and add some suggestions (if I can think of any, there is so much here already).

Modifié par Sique Foque, 01 février 2011 - 11:38 .

[wizardryforever]

Sique Foque wrote...

Great OP, I agree with everything! We need more of these calm discussions!

Do have to read the whole thread still and add some suggestions (if I can think of any, there is so much here already).

Apparently calm discussions get buried beneath piles of more inflammatory threads.  Quick, someone engage in some vaguely troll-like behavior so we can keep this thread bumped!

[Da_Lion_Man]

Very nice AdmiralCheez. As you already noticed, it was appreciated. I haven't seen you in a while... or is that just me?



Only thing I disagree with are the boss battles. I don't think they're awful but I think they aren't very special.

It wouldn't be a bad idea if Bioware would take a look at other games for boss battles.

3 games I thought that had great boss battles were Metal Gear Solid 3, Demon's Souls and Shadow of The Colossus. Of course this is all opinion. However, these 3 games rank high in my top 10 list of best games ever and I've been playing for a long time and am extremely open-minded/versatile when it comes to taste.



Of course boss battles alone don't make a great game. In fact one could argue it isn't significant. My point is that one should not underestimate the power of well done boss battles. I do not doubt that the boss battles are one of the reasons why I like those games myself, even though I maybe don't realize it.

[patocerda]

 Delightful post to read OP, agree with pretty much everything.

My 2 cents are that BioWare should think about:

  -sticking to the brilliant LotSB formula for missions and bosses alike
  -making the missions coherent as a whole, but having memorable characters (like, mixing Karpyshyn and Walters     style)
  -build momentum as the storyline passes, actually making the player to feel hurried to save the galaxy
  -keeping the RPG roots and open environments the first ME had, with the kind of solid, polished, bug-less feel ME2 had, and, at the same time, fixing everything that was actually bad in both, not removing it (and preferably coming up with great workarounds to said problems)
  -finally, somehow manage to do a mega-epic end with the best mission in the trilogy (ala ME1 Ilos-Citadel build-up/ending)

If they can pull off all of that, ME3 could very well be the masterpiece of this generation (for me, at least).

So for now BioWare, I would keep listening to constructive feedback such as the ones present on this thread, cause there are some reaally great ideas here. Anyway, just consider me as a day-one client, you deserve it.
Heh, that's it, hope not TL;DR 

Modifié par patocerda, 02 février 2011 - 12:10 .

[Jibbed34]

Funker Shepard wrote...

habitat 67 wrote...

-Skorpious- wrote...
However, I would like to add my two cents by stating my desire for a return to the classic "sci-fi" music of ME1. If ME2 had the same basic music as ME1 the atmosphere would have improved tenfold in my eyes (yes, the music is that important to me).

The music is the one thing I miss more than anything.

Yes, that too. The classic synth/orchestral fusion worked really well in ME1, I think as close as we got to it was with the N7 Mission music that shows up as part of "Testing Memories" in the ME2 Combat soundtrack - and the rest of that track represents what I had in mind pretty well.

The combat music from Eden Prime, Feros, Ilos, and  even Therum were all excellent (and I mean, some of the best score-type music I have ever heard, no matter on which medium). The ambient stuff... all brilliant. If I could change one thing about ME2, it would definitely be to have the score more in line with the first one. (The second one would be to replace the Hammerhead levels with Mako levels from the first one - prefereably mission levels, but I'd even take the Uncharted ones over what we got, but I digress...). Here's to getting the electronic back in.

Completely agree with you guys, Bioware nailed the music for ME1! I really feel like it set the tone for the whole game, it was just... incredible.

I'm not saying ME2's music was bad, but it just didn't seem right - you could've easily used 95% of that soundtrack in any other action game and got away with it.

More sci-fi stuff please!

Modifié par Jibbed34, 02 février 2011 - 12:27 .

[Jibbed34]

patocerda wrote...

 Delightful post to read OP, agree with pretty much everything.

My 2 cents are that BioWare should think about:

  -sticking to the brilliant LotSB formula for missions and bosses alike
  -making the missions coherent as a whole, but having memorable characters (like, mixing Karpyshyn and Walters     style)
  -build momentum as the storyline passes, actually making the player to feel hurried to save the galaxy
  -keeping the RPG roots and open environments the first ME had, with the kind of solid, polished, bug-less feel ME2 had, and, at the same time, fixing everything that was actually bad in both, not removing it (and preferably coming up with great workarounds to said problems)
  -finally, somehow manage to do a mega-epic end with the best mission in the trilogy (ala ME1 Ilos-Citadel build-up/ending)

If they can pull off all of that, ME3 could very well be the masterpiece of this generation (for me, at least).

So for now BioWare, I would keep listening to constructive feedback such as the ones present on this thread, cause there are some reaally great ideas here. Anyway, just consider me as a day-one client, you deserve it.
Heh, that's it, hope not TL;DR 

+1

[AdmiralCheez]

Da_Lion_Man wrote...

Very nice AdmiralCheez. As you already noticed, it was appreciated. I haven't seen you in a while... or is that just me?

Thanks.  I've only been back for a week, and during that week I've had a lot of school-related work to do.  So yeah, haven't been too active.

Only thing I disagree with are the boss battles. I don't think they're awful but I think they aren't very special.
It wouldn't be a bad idea if Bioware would take a look at other games for boss battles.

3 games I thought that had great boss battles were Metal Gear Solid 3, Demon's Souls and Shadow of The Colossus. Of course this is all opinion. However, these 3 games rank high in my top 10 list of best games ever and I've been playing for a long time and am extremely open-minded/versatile when it comes to taste.

Of course boss battles alone don't make a great game. In fact one could argue it isn't significant. My point is that one should not underestimate the power of well done boss battles. I do not doubt that the boss battles are one of the reasons why I like those games myself, even though I maybe don't realize it.

Oh yeah, there's definitely better boss battles out there, but compared to the bosses we used to have to deal with, LotSB's were a godsend.  There's always room for improvement, sure, but I think Bioware is better off focusing their efforts elsewhere.  I don't expect ME3 to become famous for its boss battles, anyway.

Of course, killng big things with big guns is always satisfying, so I can see where you're coming from.  Thanks for the input!

[aeetos21]

Some good thoughts but there's a few that I definitely don't agree with:



- Biggest two first are the charm/intimidate and how experience was handled. It takes two complete playthroughs of ME1 in order to get your character to 60. It takes closer to five or six to be able to grind out a character with full charm/intimidate without wasting skill points in either of those two trees. Experience shouldn't come from every kill you make it should come from the mission itself. If I managed to complete Noveria without killing half the mobs there should I get less experience than someone who killed every single one? Because that's what it took in ME1 to get your character to 60. Charm and intimidate meanwhile, it took me nearly three hundred hours to grind out my main, every other character I had I had to resort to putting skill points into charm and intimidate taking points away from other trees more related to combat skills. I don't want to have to be forced into making decisions like that in ME3.



- Armor, every single NPC in both ME1 and ME2 (exception Benezia) who fights is wearing some sort of hardsuit. I'm ecstatic that BW listened to the community and came out with some armor for Miranda in the new alt pack but in ME3 keep it how it was in ME1. Armor for missions and casual while on the ship - including spellcasters. You cited the Shadow Broker DLC, the spectre you fight (a spellcaster) she was in full heavy armor. So was the leader of the eclipse sisters on Ilium. This isn't WoW or Dragon Age. Armor has no impact whatsoever on biotics, don't retcon.



-Thermal clips, yes they're big bulky and nowhere does Shepard has the space to carry all of them but then enemies don't die in ME2 from one or two shots like real people do in real life (or enemy characters in first shooter like CoD). Until that happens Shepard will always need lots of ammo. Still I do like the load and shoot system better than the cooldown one. It added another combat mechanic to consider - infinite ammo was just too easy. However a better explanation why the change would've been better.



-Keep the loyalty missions, I enjoy them, but unless you're creating a default Shepard I feel that if Miranda was loyal to me in ME2 then I won't lose her loyalty in ME3 if we don't have the time to go blow up her dad's laboratory or something (that can wait until endgame). However if I'm taking on a new squadmate who I've never worked with before, then I can see their loyalty being in question and that mission might be a bit more mandatory if I want to succeed in whatever you have in store for ME3.



- Don't know what you're getting at by ME2 being cut and paste, its a third person shooter based on GoW. No two maps were cut and paste. If you're talking about combat gameplay in itself then that's not going to change, that's how ME works.



- Sandbox worlds, I loved in ME1. The ability to sit a couple of kilometers back and snipe an enemy (actually SNIPE and not aim your scope at some guy just a hundred meters away who I could take down with my pistol just as easily as my sniper) that was cool. So if ME3 could somehow combine the best of both worlds (because even with the loss of long range sniping I still preferred those UNC to the one in ME1) that'd be best.



- Dive deeper into the friendships with the squadmates, not just the romance.



Other than that though, good list.

[Mariquis]

[quote]AdmiralCheez wrote...

-The Galaxy Map.  *snip*
[/quote]
Pretty much agreed as I too preferred the ME1 map. I see some people say that it was kind of incoherent at points though and I can understand why. I think maybe this was because you tended to arbitrarily travel through the mass effect relays at points when you were just browsing the map - making it seem like you were travelling (if I remember correctly). If they replaced 'survey' with 'travel to planet' (or something more eloquent, which I am not) and only used the relay 'cutscenes' after you fully selected what planet you wanted to travel to it might alleviate the confusion.  I've also seen people complain that sometimes there are too many markers on the galaxy, which I've sometimes experienced.  What if the system details would 'pop up' like those vid screens you walk near and the interface pops up.  It would be a tidy little window,that would show you wanted you wanted, when you wanted it, but otherwise wouldn't obscure the galaxy view.
[quote]
-Squadmate Armor.  *snip*
[/quote]
I think a good solution would be to introduce another variable to the already existing armor customization screen: light/heavy/medium.  With bonuses appropriate for the classes which would mostly used them (Light having more biotic/tech enhancement, heavy more constitution, with medium a mix). If even two more 'styles' were introduced (styles as in that top bottom armor split, or the basic armor you have on initially) it would also really make things more individualized.  There were plenty of unique armor styles in ME1 to draw from too, so new design work wouldn't even be necessary.  Same with patterns.  There were only three in ME2, but say we got a couple more (which would be easy to implement as it is just colouring, I think) it would make things feel much more personal.

As for squaddie armor, I definitely agree there should be casual armor (which shows personality) and offship armor (which is functional) it makes more sense lore wise by far.  I'd even be willing to give up multiple armors if only to have this distinction
[quote]
-Exploration.  *snip*
[/quote]
I personally thought the terrain was handled excellently in the Ovelord DLC and would like to see more of it.  It worked well with the vehicle, gave a sense of open world, and was absolutely beautiful. I absolutely agree that the feeling of 'final frontier' was missing from ME2 though. The exploration of undeveloped planets really gives a feeling of 'holy ****!  I AM in space!' which you didn't really get from the maps in ME2 (which were pretty much all developed).  If it was implemented like the landscapes in overlord it would be awesome.
[quote]
-Vehicles.  *snip*
[/quote]
I agree that most of the problems were primarily with the landscapes, but the Mako did have some issues.  There were times when driving that you'd hit just a small rivet or bump and the Mako would go careening off in some arbitrary directino.  This was exacerbated by the fact that the mako turned extremely sharply.  You'd try to correct and all of a sudden you were heading the opposite direction, and repeat ad nauseum. When this happened I'd often have to fully stop reorient before going fast forward again which was irritating.

If the Mako returns I'd like to see this fixed.  If the hammerhead returns I'd like to see a heavy gun (makes you feel like you're actually doing something rather than endless pew pew pew), the ability to save while in the vehicle and be able to exit the vehicle at will. Armor I'm kind of torn about.  On one hand it would be nice to have more armor, but the hammerhead is more 'go fast and don't get hit' than 'soak up fire and outlast your enemy.'
[quote]
-Experience.  *snip*
[/quote]
I disagree and think experience should be given as a lump sum at the end.  This is simply because it limits choices/impacts gameplay if the only way to level up efficiently is to kill every thing possible.  If you get a lump sum at the end it allows you to A) resolve the situation peacfully or Kill everyone possible.  Both are acceptable solutions, and thus should net you the same XP.  Perhaps if there was something else to encourage exploring the environment, like more dialogue points during missions, more collectable (like the Quarian ship model, research upgrades, etc.)

I do think that the end mission screens should be relocated though. Some of them were also jarringly placed. At the end of a particular recruitment mission, you have the option to look around first, and when you eventually choose to go back to the normandy you just stare jarringly at someone for a moment then 'bing!' mission end screen! You're back on the normandy. It just kind of takes you out of the game. Even if a small shot was shown in these scenarios where shepard leaves the building/area/gets in the shuttle whatever would be a bit better.  I also think the end mission screen could be relocated to a terminal.  Either Shepards' or (if she returns in ME3) Miranda's. Miranda could be writing mission reports, or maybe Shepard simply keeps a log.  That way the players who want to see how many creds/minerals they collected etc. can see, and the ones who don't won't have it interrupting their game.  Also since it's basically just a text email it would be easy to make.
[quote]
-Paragon/Renegade system.  *snip*
[/quote]
I fully agree.  I loved loved loved the paragon/renegade interrupts, but I don't think your 'points' should be indicative of your game choices.  I would love to see a branching (or generic) persuade skill back in the game.  Becuase yes, I really do feel pressured to pick choices I might not have otherwise if only so I can achive certain dialogue options later on. Perhaps keep the paragon/renegade meter result only from plot decisions, but have dialogue work with persuade? That seems more logical anyhow. I honestly don't have an opinion on the scarring since it could be removed, though I wanted to see more attention to the cybernetics as a whole. 
[quote]
-Powers.  *snip*
[/quote]
Global cooldowns made a lot more sense to me on every level - lore and gamplayl. Biotics probably can't toss out five high level 'spells' in a row and maintain them all (in canon they're draining!) and engineers might have trouble running multiple programs at a time, etc etc. They also made the game more tactical which I liked. I don't think the powers need to be changed for biotics because a lot of the 'ineffective' ones still had impacts on the enemies (which is what I think you were suggesting)... just not as advertised. You can use singularity on shielded enemies for instance, and it staggers them. I use 'ineffective' powers all the times - oftentimes to buy me time, and I think that's fine as is, though that's just my opinion. As a whole I have no complaints on how the biotics work, I just see people complain about them on the forum a lot.
[quote]
-Shepard's animations.  *snip*
[/quote]
Agreed. The femshep man walk was a bit strange.  Not terrible, but would have been nice to have a seperate animations so fshep doesn't drink ryncol through her nostrils.
[quote]
-DLC armor.  *snip*
[/quote]
Agreed! Or if not a toggle then at least gone at plot appropriate points!  I was wearing my dragon armor when I first saw Tali again and she 'recognized' me.  Really? How did she manage that? I was wearing a solid metal faceplate and gender-ambiguous body suit! Also drinking through the helmet was impressive certainly, but really weird.
[quote]
-Heat sinks.  *snip*
[/quote]
I believe this was more a gamplay issue. In another thread a dev said that they actually tried that model, but that it didn't play as well (they also offered up the files or info to mod your game in order to allow that system if you wanted to try).  If they combined the two I would think the guns would have to overheat reasonably quickly (aka you couldn't shoot for a a minute straight). Shooting endlessly was completely broken in ME1, and you had to specifically hamstring yourself in order to not experience this (no frictionless materials or spectre gear). So you'd have to develop good judgement (when to stop shooting), or stick to reloading every time.  Simply allowing for the ME1 gameplay mechanic while restricting sinks wouldn't work. If they restricted heatsinks then everyone would have to play ME1 style or else they would run out quickly, especially on insanity... which ultimately doesn't result in a combat choice. As a design style to help keep the lore consistent there was another thread where a person altered the 'reloading' graphic so that instead of showing 'zero ammo' it simply showed the gun as overheated.  Each shot filling the bar a bit.  This I think would feel more in place with the lore, without changing the ME2 gameplay.
[quote]
-Loyalty missions.  *snip*
[/quote]
Entirely agreed. Loved them, but in the next game instead of having them as a specific and separate thing I'd like to see them incoroporated in to other plot specific missions as you mentioned.
[quote]
-Weapons.  *snip*
[/quote]
I agree. I really liked how ever weapon had it's own niche, but I'll have to take your word that the SMG selection was rather sprase in vanilla game -  I can't remember!
[quote]
-Skills and squadmates.  *snip*
[/quote]
I am torn on this one. I definitely liked how skills were more streamlined, but I wasn't so keen on how each level took more points to go up as it often left 'orphan points.'  More branching powers would be awesome, but I don't really expect or require it.

My major gripe was the points requirements in certain areas.  If my points are going to be restricted in this way then for the love of god let me put them where I want to.  I can understand why some skills might require you to put some points in before unlocking another skill.. but Disruptor ammo half way to get Cryo ammo? Why? Other than being ammo powers they're not particularly related. I could see needing a couple points in warp to get warp ammo for instance, or a couple points in overload to get disruptor ammo, but some of them just seem so arbitrary. Also if I do this to get cryo ammo then I have orphan points. The worst part though (I'm not sure if this was a glitch) but some of my squaddies had points automatically alotted when I got them (particularly their loyalty skill, they'd often have one point in it)... but what if I don't want their loyalty skill? This means I can only max out two talents instead of three because of that arbitrary point in their loyalty skill that I didn't want. If that's a glitch it needs to be fixed, if it's not well.. it's something that I would prefer not be implemented again in ME3
[quote]
-Boss fights.  *snip*
[/quote]
I have no opinion on this really.
[quote]
-Interaction.  *snip*
[/quote]
I both agree and disagree with this. The characters in this game actually talked a lot, far more than in ME1 I found. Because I'm a total dork I scratched down numbers of character comments during one the second surprise plot mission.  I took Garrus (1) and Kasumi (2).  Garrus spoke nine times. Kasumi spoke eight times. EDI spoke six. Garrus also had three interaction cutscenes were he spoke, Kasumi had two, and EDI had three. (+/- 1 because I have a short attention span). So I honestly think the character dialogue was much more present in this game. However I agree that we really didn't see the characters talking to each other - it felt like every character was lying dormant between missions since they barely seemed to interact at all. We got no feel for group dynamics excepting two 'crisis' loyalty points. This is something that I'd really like to see in ME3 (dragon age spoiled me!). 

Although I don't know about the elevators. I didn't mind the elevators as load screens, but the artificially lengthened ones.. eugh. The load screens in ME2 are way faster for me. If the elevator only lasted as long as it took for the dialogue to end then I wouldn't mind a return (and if there was no dialogue for it to only be as fast as the loading time).
[quote]
-Level design.  *snip*.
[/quote]
I pretty much agree. I'd like to see  ME1s visual bigness coupled with ME2s (more) differentiated enviroment - though I'd still like to see a bit more work on the atmosphere of the game.  I'd also like to see more 'alive' environments. All it takes is a couple of extra NPCs walking around - they don't even have to say anything! It would keep the hub worlds from feeling so static. The shadow broker DLC felt amazing to me for it's unique enviroments that looked fresh and unique, the overlord LDC was great for this too (as well as parts of Kasumi's). So I hope to see more of it in the future. 
[quote]
-Endgame.  *snip*
[/quote]
I also loved the way that the specififc things you did altered your success or failure during the Suicide mission, my only critique is that what those things were were pretty transparent.  I would like to see these kinds of decisions a bit more spread out and varied - maybe their effects arent' immediately obvious.  I'd like to se more stuff like you save this guy on random planet A and later he gives you protoype plans for something awesome which will save someone's life.  Or heck, maybe you do some dirty work for someone and your reward is some intel that saves someone's life. But I definitely loved the way that your decisions actually made a difference.
[quote]
-One more thing.  *snip*
[/quote]
Agree so hard. I hope all ME2 return significantly in some capacity. They don't even have to be squaddies, but so long as they make a difference (and not just a 2 min cameo or an email).

[jeweledleah]

Not sure if its been mentioned before, forgive me if it was. improve the movement differences between male and female characters (its not just Shepard, have you see Miranda walk???)



if Female Shep could get the same dance as human females/asari, while Male Shepard and other male characters would be able to dance like a certain Turian during a certain loyalty mission instead of like someone's lame dad - that would be lovely too. don't even have to animate new dances, just reuse the ones already in game.

[Big I]

If I could give one bit of feedback to the devs, it's be to increase the ammo capactiy of the initial sniper rifle.

My favorite class is Infiltrator, and I took it because I favour a playstyle of long range sniper. I found it awesome that with the right ammo activated you could take down enemies with one shot. That's what I took the class to do. The problem is that with only ten shots, you would run out of ammo before the end of a fight, forcing you to either run around picking up thermal clips or switch to the SMG, neither of which I enjoy. Similarily, I found myself sticking with the initial sniper rifle until I got the Widow because to me the Viper and the Incisor played more like a pistol and a SMG with a scope respectively.

I though the Widow was great, not just because of it's high damage but because of it's increased clip capacity. I was still having to be careful of my shots, but I could count on being able to finish a fight without having to constantly worry about ammo.