461 réponses à ce sujet

[MoonChildTheUnholy]

Lets not forget the global power cool down, i mean each power should have its own cool down and separate tech from biotics, even medi-gel for that matter, its just stupid to use a biotic power and have to wait to use medi-gel or a tech power no? this makes gameplay much slower to biotic and tech heavy classes.

[Veex]

DaPinkMenace wrote...

stat based accuracy

Of all the things that could return I believe this would be the least likely.

Modifié par Veex, 11 février 2011 - 03:03 .

[Ulzeraj]

Veex wrote...

DaPinkMenace wrote...

stat based accuracy

Of all the things that could return I believe this would be the least likely.

Nuke it from orbit.

And if they compare again ME2 accuracy (aim and shoot) system is like punching a DM... I wouls say that I as a player would love the idea.

Modifié par Ulzeraj, 11 février 2011 - 04:12 .

[Kaldarm]

I too was very disappointed with ME2. It felt like one of the shallowest (level progression wise) RPG's I've played. I've heard it compared to GTA:SA and I can't get that out of my head. I don't actually believe that it's as non-RPG as that game but it's closer IMO to that than it is to the levelling and progression of ME1. ME2 IS a rpg, just a very shallow one as far as gameplay mechanics go.



I fully expect ME3 to be closer to ME2 than ME1, simply because of how successful ME2 has been and they've already stated they will keeping an inventory system akin to that of ME2 as apparently it's received overwhelming praise... Hmm... do they read these forums often? I've seen more complaints than praise. ME1 inventory was terrible but ME2 didn't really have one, it just had lockers and a wardrobe.

[MoonChildTheUnholy]

I do enjoy the combat much more in mE2 than in ME1, top things i liked were the robots and the ways we could rip their arms and legs, headshots for the infiltrator ^^.



Now ME3 just needs to have a little more regarding customization and control over the team, stats in gear are one of the things i do miss too, let us customize our squad like in ME1 and we don´t need a system like in ME1, the one in ME2 is just fine but open all the options Shepard has to the hole team, that can´t be too hard imho.

[bjdbwea]

GTA:SA is not a good comparison. That game is quite nonlinear, whereas ME 2 doesn't even try to be. Furthermore, GTA:SA has a well written story, whereas ME 2 does not. As far as RPG elements are concerned, GTA:SA tried to be a bit more complex, instead of the opposite. Overall, the developers of GTA:SA didn't change the formula for the successor to their previous successful game, but just tried to refine and improve upon it. Exactly what should have been expected for ME 2 as well.

[HTTP 404]

to label or not to label...

[Manic Sheep]

The skill set needs to be expanded tho I actually think it was better than ME1. ME2 had less skills and less skill points but when you did invest a skill point it made much more difference. I had to think about it more around the beginning in ME2 than I did in ME1. However because there are only a few skills there isn’t really that much difference between builds unless you go really out of the box and there also wasn’t any real support role in the game. I also think it could use things like upgrade slots and weopon mods back for weopions and armor. The upgrade system for ME2 wasn’t great. There is no trade off or thought involved, you just buy every upgrade you come across to steadily increase your effectiveness.

As for the rest, I’m pretty happy with it. I don’t think ME2 needs to bring back the more “traditional” rpg elements. There are plenty of more traditional rpgs out there many of which I have, we don’t need ME to be another one. ME is a hybrid of and rpg and shooter. They took out most of what I dislike about rpg and left the things I like. The ability to play a role and make choices that affect the game world. To me that’s what makes an rpg good or bad. Not saying ME did this perfectly or anything I just don’t think the other ‘rpg element’ are necessary or even really what makes something a good rpg or not.

Things like inventory management and looting, selling I don’t like, honestly where you are wondering around in a huge open world rpg like FO then it fits and in the FO games it didn’t really bother me too much. With ME you’re not some random wonderer carrying everything around on your back looking for adventure yourself and everything is much more linear. What is there to gain form an inventory system in ME? it’s not atmospheric, you a spectre on very important usually urgent missions. You shouldn’t be stopping to loot every random merc you come across and its doesn’t make sense that you could be carrying around 3 different sniper rifle. The inventory system is completely unnecessary. I think what they currently have where you pick witch weapons you bring at the start either of personal preference or what will be most effective against that type of enemy (making it a strategic choice) and you go is much better. Cleaner, faster, less of a chore and makes more sense in the context of this game.
 
Stat based accuracy in anything other than a point and click annoys me. I hated it in ME1. Damage is fine I guess but please not accuracy. In any case shepard is a marine regardless of how you want to RP your shepard in other areas being good with a gun is something all shepards should be in the context of this game. Along with being a great leader and strong willed.

I don’t like the paragon/ renegade system as I’ve said many times because it tends to force you into a para or ren role but you can work around it.  It was a good enough concept I suppose but fails in execution. Still a lack of stat based coercion does not stop you from RPing shepards with different levels of intelligences or ability to be persuasive. Some being politically savvy and other that aren’t. You just have to regulate yourself rather than having stats barring out your options. Just because you have an option open to you doesn’t mean you have to use it. Don’t think you character should be able to steam role the reporter with a fantastic speech out of the blue? Simple, don’t pick the glowing blue or red option. Pick one of the white ones.

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 11 février 2011 - 08:11 .

[AlanC9]

Manic Sheep pretty much covered what I wanted to say, except that it's really funny how limited some people's definition of "RPG" is. In PnP RPGs there's a lot of diversity, but whenever a CRPG does something different people start saying it isn't really an RPG.

[Slayer299]

ME2 needs to fix the "skills" they had for it. Skill level 2- 3 were pointless and added nothing to the ability whatsoever. Only lvl 1 (for getting it) and lvl 4 had any value, it was better to just wait until you had 9 more skill points than to "upgrade" it level by level..



ME3 needs to bring back some good RPG skills from ME1 like Charm/Intimidate. Your choices to do either shouldn't solely be determined by Paragon/Renegade scores for your Shep.



No more linear combat areas, (Not all) and tons of low cover everywhere you go. More than 1, (go straight up the middle) option. How about letting us use stealth or flanking? Or even *gasp* open areas without cover!

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

bjdbwea wrote...

GTA:SA is not a good comparison. That game is quite nonlinear, whereas ME2 doesn't even try to be.

What? Wow, am sorry I have to ask, have you actually played ME2 past Horizon? Because this comment of yours clearly says to me that you haven't if you think that. I could point out why but due to where this topic is, I won't. As one of the 'people defending ME2' I could point out that to some degree it improved in the non-linearity stakes that ME didn't have much of. Not saying ME sucked, far from it, but to try and proclaim that ME2 was anything but non-linear, you have to say same of ME if you really did believe that.

Also your earlier post about 'people defending ME2' won't go down too well with mods, whilst you are entitled to your opinion of what an RPG is, you aren't speaking for everyone who likes RPGs so stop trying to claim that you are. Everyone has their opinion of what an RPG is. As this topic and all the other countless re-hashed topics have proven and never will everyone agree on a set specific of what makes one due to this.

Edit: @Slayer299 if they had that last idea of yours, people would probably get massacred on 'Insanity' if they were facing a large number of enemies

Modifié par Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien, 11 février 2011 - 08:25 .

[Thompson family]

Re: OP

This issue is so dead, the Lazarus Project couldn't bring it back.

BioWare's made its decision, folks. ME2 just won the gaming industry's equivalent to the Oscar, very largely due to the vastly improved pacing.

Vocal as it is, the die-hard RPG fanbase is too small.

Modifié par Thompson family, 11 février 2011 - 09:06 .

[AlanC9]

Slayer299 wrote...

ME2 needs to fix the "skills" they had for it. Skill level 2- 3 were pointless and added nothing to the ability whatsoever. Only lvl 1 (for getting it) and lvl 4 had any value, it was better to just wait until you had 9 more skill points than to "upgrade" it level by level..

Agreed. I'd also like to see more powers (that's the word?) on the NPCs. I though Shepard had enough, though I'm not too happy with how Shep acquires the additional powers.

ME3 needs to bring back some good RPG skills from ME1 like Charm/Intimidate. Your choices to do either shouldn't solely be determined by Paragon/Renegade scores for your Shep.

Yep. Second-worst Bio design descision ever.

No more linear combat areas, (Not all) and tons of low cover everywhere you go. More than 1, (go straight up the middle) option. How about letting us use stealth or flanking? Or even *gasp* open areas without cover!

There were a fair number of areas where you could flank in ME2, but I'd like to see this as a general rule rather than an exception.

And if they're going to drop cover objects around, how about having them throughout the area? It sometimes gets real obvious that you're about to be shot at.

[Kaldarm]

Um, what's with the music on this post now???

[Thompson family]

Kaldarm wrote...

Um, what's with the music on this post now???

It's annoying. Other than that, I have no details.

[Skydive]

Thompson family wrote...

BioWare's made its decision, folks. ME2 just won the gaming industry's equivalent to the Oscar, very largely due to the vastly improved pacing.

Game of the year awards are a joke. Best 'whatever' in the last 12months doesn't make something good.. just better than it's competitors. Kinda like winning a gold medal in the Special Olympics (terribly analogy, I know).

While the awards might be nice, Bioware are in the business of making money not art.

Modifié par Skydive, 12 février 2011 - 02:23 .

[alan614]

Slayer299 wrote...

ME3 needs to bring back some good RPG skills from ME1 like Charm/Intimidate. Your choices to do either shouldn't solely be determined by Paragon/Renegade scores for your Shep.

+1 on this. The classical RPG players don't just yearn for statistics to be involved in combat but also in story. Also, Inventory management and loot is more of a Computer RPG thing, not RPG in general. What Mass Effect 2 lacked is that it's story didn't care much about your character build, nor were you actually even able to build or grow your character at all outside of combat.

I didn't feel like I was assuming a role in Mass Effect universe but rather I was just reading a "Choose your own adventure" book and playing a shooter in between chapters.

Modifié par alan614, 12 février 2011 - 02:51 .

[Thompson family]

Skydive wrote...

Thompson family wrote...

BioWare's made its decision, folks. ME2 just won the gaming industry's equivalent to the Oscar, very largely due to the vastly improved pacing.

Game of the year awards are a joke. Best 'whatever' in the last 12months doesn't make something good.. just better than it's competitors. Kinda like winning a gold medal in the Special Olympics (terribly analogy, I know).

While the awards might be nice, Bioware are in the business of making money not art.

Being judged by your peers as a better game  than "Red Dead Redemption" is no joke.

[rubyreader]

StElmo wrote...

While loot is cool. It is only cool in non-linear worlds. I just don't see the point in having chests you can't open in Mass Effect, if the level is going to be "move from point A to point B", which is what allows ME to be so cinematic.

I like role playing elements that effect combat, but I really don't want finding loot and having to manage weapons etc. when it's such a linear game.

If it was an open world game, you would think RPG elements would work better, because you would have to plan the adventure your self. But seeing as Mass Effect is an open game packaged as linear missions, RPG elements feel like boring chores, then explorative adventures.

If that makes sense?

ME2 was perfect except for the mining and the lack of Mako-esque missions.

You don't need chests to have loot. ME2 showed that, heck MOST RPG's have much of their loot just on dead bodies or in random spots. Though it would reward Techs (or whatever safecracking class/skill you would invest in rather than direct combat ability). More to the point from what I gather, for some people, the whole point is role playing elements that affect combat...as in shouldn't you be able t oroleplay your way OUT of combat? Or at least direct confrontation? And no the infiltrator doesn't count. You have a deadaly first strike, limited potential for tactical mobility and maybe a couple boosted pot shots in a given fight. Maybe more like hacking your way past a checkpoint or turning on autodefenses to mulch your enemies. Or using that cinematically derived, but in no way affecting gameplay, charisma to charm your way past certain problems...and yes basically Deus Ex.

internaty inmortelaty wrote...

I just want to be able to use all guns again not be limeted to guns by class:(

Agreed. I don't mind having hard limits (like two rifles and a sidearm at most), but I should get to choose what I carry with me.

Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

GTA:SA is not a good comparison. That game is quite nonlinear, whereas ME2 doesn't even try to be.

What?
Wow, am sorry I have to ask, have you actually played ME2 past Horizon?
Because this comment of yours clearly says to me that you haven't if
you think that. I could point out why but due to where this topic is, I
won't. As one of the 'people defending ME2' I could point out that to
some degree it improved in the non-linearity stakes that ME didn't have
much of. Not saying ME sucked, far from it, but to try and proclaim that
ME2 was anything but non-linear, you have to say same of ME if you
really did believe that.

Also your earlier post about 'people
defending ME2' won't go down too well with mods, whilst you are entitled
to your opinion of what an RPG is, you aren't speaking for everyone who
likes RPGs so stop trying to claim that you are. Everyone has their
opinion of what an RPG is. As this topic and all the other countless
re-hashed topics have proven and never will everyone agree on a set
specific of what makes one due to this.

Edit: @Slayer299 if they
had that last idea of yours, people would probably get massacred on
'Insanity' if they were facing a large number of enemies

I think you nailed the point but not the consequence. Yes that WOULD be bad if combat can only be addressed as it is in ME2 (and ME1 too). But if you ARE taking on a cinematic role, that of an incredibly (in)famous charismatic badass, well you can solve the issue of a room full of potential enemies in different ways than small variations of everyone in the room dies. You can get them to back down, hack an environmental condition in your favor, bypass them entirely, stealth and hold the leader hostage, etc.

Modifié par rubyreader, 12 février 2011 - 09:57 .

[stuboy52]

ha most people here dont even though what a rpg is i mean it just means role playing game not role playing game with overly deep and pointless spreadsheets of data about character with a little everything must be customisable. it a wide genre and me1 isnt more of a rpg than me2 with that in mind which is a common misconseption with the classic they are dulling down rpgs into shooters arguement.

[rubyreader]

Autolycus wrote...

ME3 will not go back to ME1's system, thats pretty much a guarantee.
Personally, I'm glad, as I thought the inventory system etc in ME1 was pretty useless, and was glad they ditched it in ME2.

From an RPG POV, I actually don't think it makes any difference, ME2 is no less an RPG imo, though from the very start, it was always a hybrid anyway.

I don't quite understand that dichotomy as an argument. I understand where it comes from, in response to where people state a desire to return to ME1, but it's not much of an argument. Yes ME1's inventory was clunky, but the oodles of other RPG's with better inventory systems would suggest it's not impossible to improve it without eliminating it. I mean are weapon mods that require more tradeoffs like what was built into the weapons in ME2 such a bad thing? Or armor anythings?

I mean yes having to sell everything off was tedious, eliminate it by just degrading everything to omni-gel, done and done. If you want to recall something, have it refabricated, but then obviously with the limit that you need to have the specs for it. Heck even do away with the looting of bodies since we are streamlining everything.

That and more abilities. Ideally such that I have noncombat skills to invest in, but barring that just a little more variety then.

stuboy52 wrote...

ha most people here dont even though
what a rpg is i mean it just means role playing game not role playing
game with overly deep and pointless spreadsheets of data about character
with a little everything must be customisable. it a wide genre and me1
isnt more of a rpg than me2 with that in mind which is a common
misconseption with the classic they are dulling down rpgs into shooters
arguement.

I agree with your comment about what RPG stands for, I completely disagree with the idea that any and all RPG's are equally RPG's. I'd argue the Legend of Zelda is an RPG featuring limited choice, inventory, power progression, but lacking in many other qualities that are more generally found in RPG's. Perhaps a deep (overly is a much more subjective contention) inventory system isn't core tenet, but I'd argue at the least it is a genre convention. For me, if we are already accepting that for some reason Shep doesn't have access to the best gear immediately and he is piecing diverse techs together to improve his stuff, then there is little reason to accept why he can't mod his gear to his specs as he sees fit and limited by only what feasibly exists in universe (ie beam weapons are largely offlimits to nonReaper associates).

Modifié par rubyreader, 12 février 2011 - 10:13 .

[Lunatic LK47]

[quote]rubyreader wrote...


[quote]I don't quite understand that dichotomy as an argument. I understand where it comes from, in response to where people state a desire to return to ME1, but it's not much of an argument. Yes ME1's inventory was clunky, but the oodles of other RPG's with better inventory systems would suggest it's not impossible to improve it without eliminating it. I mean are weapon mods that require more tradeoffs like what was built into the weapons in ME2 such a bad thing? Or armor anythings[/quote] [/quote]

Problem with the trade-offs is it devolves into "Take mods that have more plus than minuses." Can you tell me with a straight face that you'll install a mod that will say "You'll get more damage, but your weapon will overheat faster and reduce your accuracy?" I always sold high explosive rounds every ****ing time because it made my weapons useless after firing three rounds.

[quote]I mean yes having to sell everything off was tedious, eliminate it by just degrading everything to omni-gel, done and done. If you want to recall something, have it refabricated, but then obviously with the limit that you need to have the specs for it. Heck even do away with the looting of bodies since we are streamlining everything.[/quote][/quote]
Uh, omni-gelling is just as tedious and it is big enough to fill a weapons cache in Afghanistan (i.e. Parking-lot sizes)

Modifié par Lunatic LK47, 12 février 2011 - 10:36 .

[stuboy52]

rubyreader i see where you come from i was taking from a more realistic view while the things i said didnt make an rpg and rpg are commonly associated with rpgs and i by no means mind deep elements but what i cant stand people saying is pure rpg as that is silly as it is a matter of opinion what one thinks is key to a textbook rpg as there is no rulebook on what a rpg must have