160 réponses à ce sujet

[Whoo71]

The way I like to put that is, Mass Effect has always looked like a shooter, but Mass Effect 1 didn’t really play like one.

<_<

Modifié par Whoo71, 09 mars 2011 - 02:54 .

[ianmcdonald]

Mass Effect isn't strictly one thing or another. It has elements from a bunch of different genres and that's what makes it a fun franchise.

[Renegade133]

how was the shooting hard pick your weapon and pile atts into it

[Lunatic LK47]

Renegade133 wrote...

how was the shooting hard pick your weapon and pile atts into it

Uh, except for a game that plays like a shooter, the mechanics should work well. Spending skill points just to shoot a weapon properly is not that good of a design if you're trying to promote the 'Action' part of the RPG. It's like saying, "Oh, you want to participate in basketball? Play the game with one arm until you have enough times in the basketball court."

[Terror_K]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Renegade133 wrote...

how was the shooting hard pick your weapon and pile atts into it

Uh, except for a game that plays like a shooter, the mechanics should work well. Spending skill points just to shoot a weapon properly is not that good of a design if you're trying to promote the 'Action' part of the RPG. It's like saying, "Oh, you want to participate in basketball? Play the game with one arm until you have enough times in the basketball court."

That logic is stupid. With that mentality you may as well say the same for the skills in a fantasy RPG, or for any skills in any RPG that one levels up. The only reason it fails in ME1 is because of how good Commander Shepard is supposed to be; if Shepard had been a green recruit then it really wouldn't have been much of an issue (although he would have become a shooting God far too quickly).

[Vena_86]

AlanC9 wrote...

Vena_86 wrote...
You had the citadel and you would board the Normandy through the hatch and not just by teleporting there with a loading screen. There is this kind of thought process "Where do I have to go next? The Normandy. Where is the Normandy? It's over there..."  and you usually wouldn't have to go a long way to go back. Stuff like this engages the player because he thinks of the levels as environments and not just backgrounds for the action.

It didn't engage me. Maybe that's because I come from PnP RPGs:

GM: "You guys heading back to the ship?"
Player: "Sure. We're done here."

You had open planet surfaces with points of interest you find your self rather than beeing bottlenecked from A to B. Same concept. I hear Hudson saying things like "explore the galaxy" in early interviews, but there is no more exploration in ME2 if you just follow predetermined paths. You don't explore, the game does it for you.
Although there was a lot of linear level design too in ME1 it was still far more open, thus giving the player a better sense of immersion and purpose.

If anything, most of the ME1 exploration content actually broke immersion for me. Shepard's going around hunting up mineral deposits on unknown worlds? Really?

And double that for the inventory system and weapon skills, which were obviously in there because they thought some folks would need traditional RPG elements, not because they fit the story.

For the first point I think it has a lot to do with me beeing a fan of astronomy and science fiction. I like the idea of stepping into the surface of a planet that is millions that is thousdands and thousands of lightyears away from earth. The first game was a science fiction game and I was part of the target audience. Tastes are different obviously.

As for the mineral hunting, ME2 has planet scanning for that, which is less engaging and more rediculous because that is exactly what EDI or a crewman should do.

Inventory and weapon skills...I don't see what that has to do with level design. I also didn't say anything about RPG elements or mechanics. Discussions won't work if everyone just pulls everything towards the RPG vs Shooter fight.

[tonnactus]

Terror_K wrote...




That logic is stupid.

With the same logic someone could argue why an adept shepardt has to learn to throw people. But no idiot complained about that for some strange reason...

In fact,biotics were teached right from the beginning of their childhood how to use their talent.And military training should improve this further.


So why is it strange to improve weapon skills but the same isnt true regarding tech and biotic skills??

Modifié par tonnactus, 09 mars 2011 - 01:34 .

[Vyse_Fina]

ianmcdonald wrote...

Mass Effect isn't strictly one thing or another. It has elements from a bunch of different genres and that's what makes it a fun franchise.

Like what?  We have shooter elements and rpg elements. What else is there? I haven't seen (proper) stealth, sport, platforming or anything else in it.  Maybe puzzlgames if you want to count the minigames.

The only things mass effect ever mixed were RPG elements and shooter elements and in ME2 they simply took the RPG aspects out of the shooter aspects for the sake of people who bought an RPG allthough they don't like RPGs and then complained about the RPG not being a shooter... Oh look, we're having this talk again >_>

Modifié par Vyse_Fina, 09 mars 2011 - 02:36 .

[Zulu_DFA]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Renegade133 wrote...

how was the shooting hard pick your weapon and pile atts into it

Uh, except for a game that plays like a shooter, the mechanics should work well. Spending skill points just to shoot a weapon properly is not that good of a design if you're trying to promote the 'Action' part of the RPG. It's like saying, "Oh, you want to participate in basketball? Play the game with one arm until you have enough times in the basketball court."

Actually, even in semi-professional sports teams coaches usually make players hone different skills by handicapping them during training.

[Nozybidaj]

xSTONEYx187x wrote...

Nice stuff. 

EDIT: 

This quote made me breath sigh of relief. 

CN: I can’t talk about any of the specific decisions or what they actually do. But what I can say is that decisions through all of the Mass Effect games, including the DLC, will matter for Mass Effect 3. And it’s not just like decisions that carried over from ME1 to ME2 will matter in ME3, they’ll be decisions in ME1 that did not visibly impact ME2 that will have an impact in ME3. What we looked at is the total story, everything that happened in Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 is real and matters, we let the writers draw on that as much as they want to customize the experience and to be pretty much without limits.

Nice, not only will we get emails about our choices from ME2, we'll get all new emails about our ME1 choices all over again.

[Zulu_DFA]

Nozybidaj wrote...

Nice, not only will we get emails about our choices from ME2, we'll get all new emails about our ME1 choices all over again.

Renegade = Anti-spam.