411 réponses à ce sujet

[R3c0nn4155nc3]

Apparently each gun has about 10, 000 rounds so ammo for EACH SINGLE engagement is usually a non-issue...unless your Wrex...hunting an Asari Commando...then an entire blown up space-station is not enough.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Ship.wreck wrote...

As I mentioned before ejecting shells ins't a function of heat managment. Yes the ignition takes place in the shell. But the propellent burns ALL the way down the barrel (and often out the end result in muzzle flash). The shell doesn't even absorb half the heat of the explosing, not even a fourth. The vast majority of the burn takes place down the barrel and as a result the vast majority of the heat is transfered directly to the weapon.

It's not that the shell sheilds the weapon from heat, it doesn't.

It's that the shell sheild the explosives inside it from the heat of the gun. In a traditional weapons system the shell of the round you're firing doesn't protect the weapon from heat AT ALL. It's that the shell of the NEXT round protects the charge from the heat of the weapon! Basically the opposite of your interpretation.

Caseless ammo didn't work out so well because the unshielded charges tended to accidently ignite do to the heat of the firing chamber from previously fired rounds. The chamber isn't any more or less hot in a normal weapon, it's just that the explosive of the last chambered round is protected from that heat by it's shell.

So shell protect the explosives from the heat of the gun NOT the gun from the heat of an explosion. Shells provide no cooling what-so-ever.

I know, way off topic.

Way off-topic, but way interesting. I didn't know that. Thanks for sharing.

[Bluko]

Pwener2313 wrote...

flem1 wrote...

And now we have two pages of troll/ignoramus posts from folks who couldn't bother to read that Christina Norman et al. tried and implemented a hybrid system, except it wasn't fun and had to be scrapped.

The decision is done folks, and gameplay much improved for it. They aren't going back now.

A level headed serious post? Not here you don't.

I'm not asking they remove Thermal Clips, even though,  yes I know that's what the OP is asking. (Of course I can't say I'd be upset if they had decided to do that.)

What I and most others are asking for is they improve upon the thermal clips. Is it wrong to want ME3 to be better then ME2?

Look for comparison: I think the Paragon/Renegade system works way better in ME2, and is a lot more fun/simple. However a number of people don't like it. And while I disagree with people who want a return of the ME1 style, I am not adverse to them coming up with a different version or better version then what ME2 uses for Charm/Intimidate options.

I don't understand why people so vehemently defend things. ME2 is a far cry from being perfect, despite what you may think. Just about anything can be improved and thinking it can't is foolish. If the Devs had decided ME1 was "perfect" then some of you probably wouldn't have liked ME2 as much right?

Some of my suggestions are:

A) Add bigger ammo reserves for certain weapons like the single shot sniper rifles, hand cannon, and shotguns.

Have additional thermal clips automatically added to your reserves every time you kill an enemy.

Tell me why this is bad. Obviously if you waste ammunition or are not careful with your shots you'll have to switch weapons for awhile. But once you kill an enemy or two you can go back to your preferred weapon. Would this be wrong? This is what ME1 did with loot to avoid the problems of should you throw an enemy over a rail you still get their loot.

Say you are out of ammo for your gun. You use Throw to get rid of an enemy by throwing it off a nearby ledge. With my suggestion you would not be penalized for your actually using your abilities due to the enemy not dropping a thermal clip. You'd reload and be good to go again.

You no longer have to go around after every fight looking for thermal clips and trying to pick them up. (I don't know about you, but sometimes for whatever reason certain clips won't pick-up. Which is pretty frustrating if you're getting shot at and need ammo.) And you don't have to worry about how you kill enemies. And it doesn't negate the need to switch weapons, but it allows people who are skilled with their perferred weapon to keep using it.

C) Attempt a hybrid system (again apparently) where thermal clips for each weapon slowly cool off. You can run out of "ammo" for a gun, but it's only temporary. Eliminates need to scavenge, but still encourages players to swap weapons. (The universal Thermal Clip idea is a silly idea to begin with since it's doubtful a shotgun and sniper rifle would all have the same barrel design to accomodate this new technology.)

[Schattenkeil]

Admoniter wrote...

Schattenkeil wrote...
I only actually saw one rl assault rifle using caseless ammunition in a museam for weapon technology of the German army, a H&K G11 assault rifle. Looks a bit like a science fiction gun, too. Wikipedia Article
The problem with those guns was indeed the overheat, due to the lacking thermic insulation through the shell. The initial ignition of the propellant happens in the shell and a lot of the combustion's heat is absorbed by the shell and cannot be transfered to the actual gun before it is ejected.

Never the less I must ask again, BW who are you and what have you done with our mass accelerator weapons?

But I agree. They come up with a fancy explanation that doesn't work, because the weapon doesn't look and feel and sound like a weapon that fits their descriptioin. When the most plausible thing they could do is say, that it simply gun, burning a chemical to propell the bullet with expanding gas.

[CroGamer002]

A) Add bigger ammo reserves for certain weapons like the single shot sniper rifles, hand cannon, and shotguns.

Current ammo reserve is fine in ME2, with exception of pistols since only Phalanx has good ammo reserve.

Have additional thermal clips automatically added to your reserves every time you kill an enemy.

That's TERRIBLE idea.
In that case I would just 1 headshot people with Widow and still have same amount of ammo for little tougher enemies.
Challenge is dead for experienced players.

C) Attempt a hybrid system (again apparently) where thermal clips for each weapon slowly cool off. You can run out of "ammo" for a gun, but it's only temporary. Eliminates need to scavenge, but still encourages players to swap weapons.

That idea is even worse.

Also Thermal Clips also encourage to swamp weapons more often.
You know, save ammo for for more powerful gun for example.

Modifié par Mesina2, 19 avril 2011 - 08:37 .

[IntrepidProdigy]

R3c0nn4155nc3 wrote...

Apparently each gun has about 10, 000 rounds so ammo for EACH SINGLE engagement is usually a non-issue...unless your Wrex...hunting an Asari Commando...then an entire blown up space-station is not enough.

Meh, Wrex is just a bad shot. 

[Bluko]

IntrepidProdigy wrote...

The system in ME1 definitely felt more futuristic, down to the mass effect fields that would trail each high speed slug. It was a much better fit to the ME universe IMO, whereas in ME2 it feels like you're firing a gun from the modern era, it feels/looks boring in comparison (as much as I like every other improvement in gameplay).

I wonder if they thought of actually giving the guns an accurate ammo count (i think it was somewhere near 1,000 rounds or less, depending on what class of gun) in relation to the block of metal that is used for a clip, when they were testing the mechanics of gameplay. There could be way less ammo drops, of course (if any at all) and it would actually make sense compared to having heat sinks that somehow never manage to cool off on their own. Call me a "dreamer", but I'm just obsessed with continuity.

Totally agree

Why not have simply added the ammo as the actual ammo blocks?

I mean okay maybe they figured counting hundreds or thousands of rounds would be too difficult or something? I dunno. But honestly they could have just made it so we only have a few dozen rounds anyways  before we'd have to reload. Also then we could have actual legit clips instead of this stupid every single "round" is preserved, which makes no sense with a Thermal Clip since there's no way you can preserve an individual shot.

I mean it would have been a lot easier to BS too. Just say that in order to inflict more damage weapons now shave off larger rounds. We've got ammo to make it funner to play, there are no continuity errors, etc. Everyone's happy.

I dunno the whole Thermal Clip thing just does not seem like it was properly thought out. The fact certain weapons run out of ammo far faster then others seems very telling this was the case.

[IntrepidProdigy]

^My thoughts exactly. It seems to me as though Bioware was looking too hard at the heat management issue vs. looking for more sensible work-arounds, either that or maybe they just ran out of time or something? Regardless, the very least they could've done was make the guns "feel" a bit more futuristic. The only time it felt like i was using a gun with rail/mass accelerator technology was when I was using the Widow.

[Ship.wreck_]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...
Way off-topic, but way interesting. I didn't know that. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks, shiek-a-something-or-other brought it up but was a little backwards on the specifics. I was just clarifying. But they're not responding to my posts for some reason. I guess he or she thinks I'm wrong

Edit: I heart physics, mechanics and weapons always way interesting stuff... so long as we keep it at an introductory conceptual level haha!

Agreed to above poster. New guns feel WAY less futuristic. In fact don't feel futuristic at all. Kinda robs the game of its sci-fi-ness.

Where's a gun that can shoot through cover, and an imaging system that can see through cover? That would be cool.

Also someone brought up that eliminating the ammo issue would make the game less tactical. No dice broski. Ammo management is just one tiny aspect of tactics. The vast majority of concerns involve your position relative to the enemy's, your disposition relative to the enemy's, moving tactically, utilizing cover tactically a million different things. Ammo is just one, taking it out leave the VAST majority of tactics alive and well. Plus heat management brings a new tactical element that changes the game significantly. It's not even that there's less tactics because the one factor eliminated is replaced with a new one. It's just that tactics have evolved in the future.

I just got done playing an uber tactical game of ME where I used Wrex to cover my six by posting him on a corner with a gauge, Garrus to pin down the enemy by putting him in the middle with an AR modded with snowblind rounds and frictionless materials to provide constant supressing fire (there's them heat management tactics!), grenades to eliminate a well covered priority target with indirect fire as I had no direct line of sight by which to shoot him, and allowed my self to outflank the remaining enemies while they were distracted by Garrus eliminating them with almost no resistance. THEN converged all units on the last couple guys and over ran them without breaking a sweat. No one on my entire squad, myself included, came anywhere near getting there sheilds broken, let alone actually taking damage, due to my use of TACTICS in a game with no ammo.

Modifié par Ship.wreck , 19 avril 2011 - 08:46 .

[Bluko]

Mesina2 wrote...

Have additional thermal clips automatically added to your reserves every time you kill an enemy.

That's TERRIBLE idea.
In that case I would just 1 headshot people with widow and still have enough for little tougher enemies.
Challenge is dead for experienced players.

Experienced players will know how to conserve ammo anyways. That's like a non-issue. It's silly that as a Sniper you should stop sniping and use a pistol or SMG and then attempt to kill enemies from afar with those weapons or close the gap, in which case you won't want to use the sniper rifle rendering it obsolete.

See this is the problem; ammo is pretty much never an issue with SMGs or Assault RIfles as you have to be extremely trigger happy to run out. I've never run out of ammo with the Revenant for example. Also doesn't the actual challenge come from the enemies themselves? I mean what's the big challenge of perserving ammo, other then knowing the level and not missing your shots? All this really does is penalize those who suck at shooters by having them run out of ammo, cause they can't aim. In which case why is there aim assist?

I mean there's still no reason to use any of the Pistols in the game really. I don't think I even bothered to switch weapons as an Adept on Insanity cause the SMGs are better in every way just about.

Also I can't really say I've run out of ammo that much for the Widow. The only difference is I literally have to pick up every stupid clip on the ground to get full ammo again.

But if you're point is that knowing how to conserve ammunition is more fun, what was the problem with ME1? When your gun overheated you simply switched to a different weapon. Isn't that the same thing in essence? True in ME1 some classes only had 1 trained weapon (not that it made Shotguns or ARs impossible to use) but that could have easily been solved by doing the same thing anyways by giving the classes additional weapons.

[Dave666]

Mesina2 wrote...

C) Attempt a hybrid system (again apparently) where thermal clips for each weapon slowly cool off. You can run out of "ammo" for a gun, but it's only temporary. Eliminates need to scavenge, but still encourages players to swap weapons.

That idea is even worse.

Also Thermal Clips also encourage to swamp weapons more often.
You know, save ammo for for more powerful gun for example.

I usually play as the Adept or Engineer, so which 'more powerful gun' am I saving ammo for again?

Even with the bonus weapon, none of them are that much more powerful. (I don't use the Mattock on principle and only bought the Firepower pack for the Phalanx, the GPS isn't exactly OP either).

Other than that, the Adept and Engineer can't use the Claymore, Revenant or the Widow and none of the other weapons are 'more powerful guns'.

[CroGamer002]

Dave666 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

C) Attempt a hybrid system (again apparently) where thermal clips for each weapon slowly cool off. You can run out of "ammo" for a gun, but it's only temporary. Eliminates need to scavenge, but still encourages players to swap weapons.

That idea is even worse.

Also Thermal Clips also encourage to swamp weapons more often.
You know, save ammo for for more powerful gun for example.

I usually play as the Adept or Engineer, so which 'more powerful gun' am I saving ammo for again?

Even with the bonus weapon, none of them are that much more powerful. (I don't use the Mattock on principle and only bought the Firepower pack for the Phalanx, the GPS isn't exactly OP either).

Other than that, the Adept and Engineer can't use the Claymore, Revenant or the Widow and none of the other weapons are 'more powerful guns'.

Adept and Engineer never run out of ammo for me since I'm to busy spamming my powers of destruction.

[flem1]

Bluko wrote...

I dunno the whole Thermal Clip thing just does not seem like it was properly thought out. The fact certain weapons run out of ammo far faster then others seems very telling this was the case.

It was quite thoroughly thought out -- to maximize fun and non-monotonous gameplay.  It succeeded.  The only people complaining at this point are the sad cases who think spending hours paging through junk inventory makes for a "real RPG".

Modifié par flem1, 19 avril 2011 - 09:25 .

[didymos1120]

Schattenkeil wrote...

But I agree. They come up with a fancy explanation that doesn't work, because the weapon doesn't look and feel and sound like a weapon that fits their descriptioin. When the most plausible thing they could do is say, that it simply gun, burning a chemical to propell the bullet with expanding gas.

Well, why should they do that? Here's a couple real world EM railguns, not too dissimilar from the mass-accelerator-based guns of ME, completely chemical-propellant free:





As you can see, they produce quite a bit of light and noise. You can find plenty of other examples of electromagnetic rail guns on Youtube, and see similar results. There's nothing particularly implausible about the notion that ME weapons have muzzle flash and generate significant noise. And yes, of course, the flash effects and sounds in the game are made-up. But so what? What standard of "accuracy" is there for weapons that don't actually exist?

[Schattenkeil]

Mesina2 wrote...

A) Add bigger ammo reserves for certain weapons like the single shot sniper rifles, hand cannon, and shotguns.

Current ammo reserve is fine in ME2, with exception of pistols since only Phalanx has good ammo reserve.

As someone who usually plays infiltrator I find the M-92 Mantis vastly inferior to the M-97 viper. It has a fifth of the ammo reserves but doesn't do five times the damage. In the basic variant, without upgrades a headshot against a normal target with armor and health but no shields and barrier isn't even a kill on hardcore and insanity, if I remember correctly.

That enemies are briefly stopped after a head shot does not do you any good with the M-92, because they continue to move on before you can continue to shoot, whereas with M-97, you can easily send a full salvo into an unmoving target that doesn't shoot back after the first hit. And it even has more margin for error, if you miss a shot.

And the only thing you get out of this is the time you stay out of cover is a tad shorter.

Whenever I had the M-92 I spend more time "snipering" with the pistol and doing melee with the submachine gun than actually using the sniper rifle.

The only situation I can think of where I find the M-92 actually superior is if you're nailed behind cover with several enemy heavies (armor & health) shoot at you. With an upgraded M-92 you only need to lean out very, very briefly to  kill one. But that's a very, very rare situation. If there is only one heavy the M-97 is the better choice in the otherwise same situation again.

I think 18 or 20 shots would be a lot more appropriate, and the gun should actually do thrice the damage of its it alternate for having only a third of the ammunition.

Modifié par Schattenkeil, 19 avril 2011 - 09:51 .

[Arijharn]

Dave666 wrote...

I usually play as the Adept or Engineer, so which 'more powerful gun' am I saving ammo for again?

Even with the bonus weapon, none of them are that much more powerful. (I don't use the Mattock on principle and only bought the Firepower pack for the Phalanx, the GPS isn't exactly OP either).

Other than that, the Adept and Engineer can't use the Claymore, Revenant or the Widow and none of the other weapons are 'more powerful guns'.

From the way I interpreted that GI ME3 article, that wont be such a problem anymore. We'll be limited to weapon slots, but not the style of weapon that makes up that slot.

I like Bluko's idea though, but to me I think I'd prefer some sort of active venting system. The best way I can describe it is if you were using the Meat Grinder weapon from Gears of War 2 (but with perhaps a more gradual 'warm up' period, which of course can depend not only on the sort of level/area you are but also what weapon you have). Eventually the weapon will get to a point where it can't operate 'safely,' so you'll have to vent it to cool it down, or you can let it cool down 'naturally' via passive radiation or whatever. You could then purchase upgrades to increase the cooldown speed (or any other option) etc, etc. I like the ammo clip system in principle, because I liked the need to be disciplined with my firepower (which died off high level in ME1) but I think actual heatclips as a game mechanic didn't work in the sense that it got a bit tedious.

If a Sniper rifles main strength was the ability to not having to reload, it sorta sounds moronic to me to have the same limitation just by another name. To say that I also disagreed with heatclips due to lore reasons is also not incorrect.

[Dave666]

Mesina2 wrote...

Dave666 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

C) Attempt a hybrid system (again apparently) where thermal clips for each weapon slowly cool off. You can run out of "ammo" for a gun, but it's only temporary. Eliminates need to scavenge, but still encourages players to swap weapons.

That idea is even worse.

Also Thermal Clips also encourage to swamp weapons more often.
You know, save ammo for for more powerful gun for example.

I usually play as the Adept or Engineer, so which 'more powerful gun' am I saving ammo for again?

Even with the bonus weapon, none of them are that much more powerful. (I don't use the Mattock on principle and only bought the Firepower pack for the Phalanx, the GPS isn't exactly OP either).

Other than that, the Adept and Engineer can't use the Claymore, Revenant or the Widow and none of the other weapons are 'more powerful guns'.

Adept and Engineer never run out of ammo for me since I'm to busy spamming my powers of destruction.

I'll be honest, same for me. (With the possible exception of the SMG for shield/barrier stripping).

Ammo conservation only really effects half of the classes, the combat ones (Soldier, Infiltrator and Vangard), the caster classes not so much, so why introduce a new mechanic into the game that only applies to half of the classes?

[CroGamer002]

Bluko wrote...

Experienced players will know how to conserve ammo anyways. That's like a non-issue. It's silly that as a Sniper you should stop sniping and use a pistol or SMG and then attempt to kill enemies from afar with those weapons or close the gap, in which case you won't want to use the sniper rifle rendering it obsolete.

1st who would use SMG and Pistol from far away distance?
2nd those who don't have sniper have powers to attack hostiles from distance

See this is the problem; ammo is pretty much never an issue with SMGs or Assault RIfles as you have to be extremely trigger happy to run out. I've never run out of ammo with the Revenant for example. Also doesn't the actual challenge come from the enemies themselves? I mean what's the big challenge of perserving ammo, other then knowing the level and not missing your shots? All this really does is penalize those who suck at shooters by having them run out of ammo, cause they can't aim. In which case why is there aim assist?

Well if they suck at shooting they shouldn't have choose Soldier or Infiltrator class.

I mean there's still no reason to use any of the Pistols in the game really. I don't think I even bothered to switch weapons as an Adept on Insanity cause the SMGs are better in every way just about.

I guess you never bought Firepower pack and used Phalanx.

Also I can't really say I've run out of ammo that much for the Widow. The only difference is I literally have to pick up every stupid clip on the ground to get full ammo again.

So you would rather to get automatically Thermal Clips magically instead of picking them up realistically?

But if you're point is that knowing how to conserve ammunition is more fun, what was the problem with ME1? When your gun overheated you simply switched to a different weapon. Isn't that the same thing in essence? True in ME1 some classes only had 1 trained weapon (not that it made Shotguns or ARs impossible to use) but that could have easily been solved by doing the same thing anyways by giving the classes additional weapons.

So you say that system in which you can't use your weapon for few seconds and use weapon in with you can't aim for sh*t while system in which when run out of ammo you can't use it until you get more ammo and use weapon which you know how to use until you get more ammo for that other weapon ENCOURAGES MORE to use other weapons?!

[R3c0nn4155nc3]

Soldier: I have 5 f*cking guns, gtfo.Also the Geth Rifle has teh most ammo tho not very good for anything cept stripping shields and the ME1 looked better. They need to get a better design.

[CroGamer002]

Dave666 wrote...

I'll be honest, same for me. (With the possible exception of the SMG for shield/barrier stripping).

Ammo conservation only really effects half of the classes, the combat ones (Soldier, Infiltrator and Vangard), the caster classes not so much, so why introduce a new mechanic into the game that only applies to half of the classes?

Because those half of classes depend on convectional weapons while others don't?

[didymos1120]

Ship.wreck wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Ship.wreck wrote...

But if you actually play ME2 and see their in game execution of that simple thermal clip description, you'll see that the clips don't work anything like they're described...

They work exactly as described: detachable heat sinks that can be swapped in less than a second.  That's all the Codex has to say about how they work.  Unless you can find me some actual in-game text that implies they actually can cool down, I don't know where you got this idea from.

Actually that's not necessary because it's an indisputable fact that all hot things eventually cool down. It's physically impossible for something to be heated and never cool.

OK, I figured this was understood, but clearly not: show me something that says they can cool as rapidly as the ME1 systems. 

They're described as being a removable version of the original built in heat sinks of ME.

If that were the case the gun would function exactly as in ME except that they could be swapped out to skip cool down waits.

No, they're said to be detachable heat sinks.  That's it.  It is never implied that they use the same design or materials as ME1 cooling systems did.  And the ME1 cooling systems themselves were never explained in that game at all.  I.e., you have no basis for this judgement at all.  You've just assumed they must both work the same and essentially be the same.  The ME2 Codex implies otherwise though:

But combatants were forced to deliberately shoot slower to manage waste heat, or pause as their weapons vented.

Certainly sounds like an active cooling system to me, which thermal clips clearly are not.

[Ship.wreck_]

didymos1120 wrote...
OK, I figured this was understood, but clearly not: show me something that says they can cool as rapidly as the ME1 systems. 

No, they're said to be detachable heat sinks.  That's it.  It is never implied that they use the same design or materials as ME1 cooling systems did.  And the ME1 cooling systems themselves were never explained in that game at all.  I.e., you have no basis for this judgement at all.  You've just assumed they must both work the same and essentially be the same.  The ME2 Codex implies otherwise though:

Assuming that "can cool" will be taken as "can cool as quickly" is a pretty big assumption. And it wouldn't matter if it took them 8 to 10 times as long to cool, they would still cool and should still be re-usable and the gun should still have the original built in version to allow firing without them.

Ah yes, kind of like how when we went from a built in box magazine that had to be reloaded in field to many external detachable box magazines that could be preloaded far in advance we completely redisigned the box magazine from the groung up.

Oh wait no, built in or detachable it's still just a damn box with a spring in it that holds bullets. Oops I forgot.

Show me an engineer who would completely re-design heat sinks from the gound up such that they can't perform to even a shadow of the capabilities of their predecessors all just for the sake of making them removable... And I'll show you an engineer who wouldn't sell any f***ing guns and would get his ass fired faster than he could say "Technological quantum leap backwards!"

However, removing the heatsink from the gun would massively increase airflow to the heatsink. By any logical assesment removable thermal clips should cool FASTER once removed than the old built in heat sinks.

Edit: and just as fast when not removed.

You don't sacrifice several giant assed advantages (rapid cool down of built in sink, indefinate re-usability of built in heat sink, ability to fire nearly unlimited ammo with built in heat sink) to gain one tiny assed advantage (detachable) especially not when it comes hand in hand with a giant assed dissadvantage (severely limited ammo - even if by bioware's rhetoric we're pretending that "ammo" is "heat capacity")

That doesn't make any sense in the context of ME, it doesn't make any sense in any context, it just doesn't make any sense.

Modifié par Ship.wreck , 19 avril 2011 - 10:21 .

[Thezezeal]

I've seen a few people mention, now, that they originally tried a Hyrbid-system, and it wasn't very good; I'm curious: what made it not good? The idea sounds fine to me, and if it didn't work well in practice, well, they could have modified it I'm sure (i.e., if the issue was it slowed battles down too much).

Let us be honest-- if we were given the Hybrid-system from the start, most people would be loving it just as much as the Heat Sink system we have right now.

[Ship.wreck_]

didymos1120 wrote...
As you can see, they produce quite a bit of light and noise. You can find plenty of other examples of electromagnetic rail guns on Youtube, and see similar results. There's nothing particularly implausible about the notion that ME weapons have muzzle flash and generate significant noise. And yes, of course, the flash effects and sounds in the game are made-up. But so what? What standard of "accuracy" is there for weapons that don't actually exist?

The sound is just electrical current and friction between barrel and projectile, I gaurantee you it's no where NEAR the sound of an explosion as in contemporary firearms. Nor would it be in these me weapons. And even if it were as loud it would sound distinct from an explosion becaues it's not generated by an explosion.

As for the light, that's not a flash of light as in firearms. That's a cascade of sparks probably also from friction between barrel and projectile, which would be eliminated in any weaponized production version.

Cool as they may be, I gaurantee you that conventional firearms fire projectiles at massively higher velocities than these garage projects. And yet we see no such cascade of sparks from their barrels.

Either way though the specific sound and look of the firing isn't really the point. The point is under the old system shooting the guns actually FELT like shooting futuristic guns. MOSTLY because of the unlimited ammo and increased necessity to manage heat. Given that the point of ME and the whole Sci-Fi genre is that it takes place in the future and is choc full of futuristic technology, that futuristic feeling is integral to a good sci fi game movie story etc...

What about the thermal clips as they'be been portrayed so far feels futuristic. NOTHING. They sound, look and most importantly ACT EXACTLY like today's non-awesomely futuristic guns. Sci Fi fail, whether you like it or not.

[Someone With Mass]

Can someone tell me what's so difficult and stressful about checking the ground for a few thermal clips after the fight?

Also, if you run out of bullets, just switch weapons/start using your offensive powers, adapt to a new tactic and fight that way.

Some people makes it sound way worse than it really is.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 19 avril 2011 - 10:57 .