As a PC user, I just didn't care about the release of Mass Effect - after all, it was an xbox exclusive, so why bother? It did catch my eye though when I noticed that you had a vehicle and could free-roam to a certain extent. I thought wow, you actually have your own car? Awesome! Having played games like KotOR I knew that RPG's were fun and it was cool to have a spaceship, but really it's just an A --> B gameplay device, nothing more.
The Mako though was different, you could actually really explore and have some fun (or not, depending on your feelings about the Mako). There was also talk about being able to customise the Mako which, as we all know, didn't make it into the game.
Still, it really threw in that one element that made Mass Effect stand out above the crowd, give it something that nothing else on the market had. Mass Effect 2, whilst being a great game, really lacks that. Is it a good game? Absolutely. Is it unique? Not really.
The Mako made 'Mass Effect' unique
Débuté par
Captain_Obvious_au
, avril 27 2011 05:15
-
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 05:20
lolwut666
-
- Members
- 1 470 messages
The problem is that the handling of the Mako was very bad, and the worlds were mostly the same. The aim was also bad.
So it was a great feature that was badly implemented.
So it was a great feature that was badly implemented.
#3
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 05:22
AdmiralCheez
-
- Members
- 12 990 messages
As far as unique features go, it was a pretty boring one. And frustrating as hell.
#4
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 05:26
jakal66
-
- Members
- 819 messages
won't miss the mako,and I didn't even have issues handling it.The other issue of it was the whole repetitive scenarios and missions...that kinda killed the mako
#6
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 05:33
lolwut666
-
- Members
- 1 470 messages
I remember this one time on Feros when the Mako vanished on me. Had to go through those brigdes on foot.
Nevermind all the geth on the way; the big problem was how long it took to get from one point to the other.
Nevermind all the geth on the way; the big problem was how long it took to get from one point to the other.
#7
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 05:34
Elken27
-
- Members
- 6 messages
The Mako is like Chocobos or Airships. It's a means to get around a "worldmap."
But they didn't stop there, they had to had it to all the main missions which is a major turn off for me. Handling it was a pain to begin with.
I'm glad it's gone. And I hope whatever they had in ME3 is more along the lines of the Hammerhead. And that you don't need to get in it.
But they didn't stop there, they had to had it to all the main missions which is a major turn off for me. Handling it was a pain to begin with.
I'm glad it's gone. And I hope whatever they had in ME3 is more along the lines of the Hammerhead. And that you don't need to get in it.
#8
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 05:34
DxWill10
-
- Members
- 510 messages
the mako didn't necessarily bother me, it was the tedious boring driving all over the same planets re-skinned to drive to the same base on every planet. regardless of the vehicle, too much of this gets boring to me
#10
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 05:44
ADLegend21
-
- Members
- 10 687 messages
Wooo Mako! *drives mako again* *profanity laced speech about how crappy it is*
#11
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 05:50
Urdnot Orrad
-
- Members
- 566 messages
lolwut666 wrote...
The problem is that the handling of the Mako was very bad, and the worlds were mostly the same. The aim was also bad.
So it was a great feature that was badly implemented.
It wasn't as bad as people seem to think, at least not for me. I rarely had problems aiming or maneuvering in the Mako myself.
#12
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 05:56
AlanC9
-
- Members
- 35 632 messages
bald man in a boat wrote...
Moon Patrol made ME unique?
I was actually thinking about the ATV from Starflight, but Moon Patrol's better.
Edit: better for snark, that is. Starflight's a more accurate fit. Of course, that game predated 3D, but you do get to drive around uncharted planets looking for mineral deposits and wrecked spacecraft. The only big difference is that doing this made sense in Starflight since you're working as a contractor for a for-proft corporation. In ME1, not so much.
Modifié par AlanC9, 27 avril 2011 - 06:08 .
#13
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:00
lolwut666
-
- Members
- 1 470 messages
Urdnot Orrad wrote...
lolwut666 wrote...
The problem is that the handling of the Mako was very bad, and the worlds were mostly the same. The aim was also bad.
So it was a great feature that was badly implemented.
It wasn't as bad as people seem to think, at least not for me. I rarely had problems aiming or maneuvering in the Mako myself.
The problem with the aim is that you had to be on terrain of the same level or lower to hit the targets. If they were lower than you, you can't hit them.
Also, if they are too close, for some reason the Mako's guns can't hit them, even though it looks like they're perfectly aimed at them.
As for the handling, I got the hang of it eventually, but when I was starting out with Mass Effect, I fell on lava lots of times because the Mako swerves too hard.
#14
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:06
Lunatic LK47
-
- Members
- 2 024 messages
Yeah, Halo's Warthog had better driving controls than the Mako (i.e. Up on analog stick= Always drive forward, Down= always reverse."). The fact that "any direction=forward" is as stupid as saying "It's perfectly fine for your car to randomly reverse when making U-Turns despite the fact your transmission is set on 'Drive.'"
#15
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:12
MrFob
-
- Members
- 5 412 messages
I wouldn't go so far as to say the Mako was MEs defining unique feature (there were plenty of others) but I thought it was fun. Not all the worlds were built for it but e.g. BDtS showed that the Mako could work just fine with some good level design. I got to say I am a bit sad that the devs hinted they are going to abandon the Mako and the Hammerhead in ME3.
#16
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:14
snfonseka
-
- Members
- 2 469 messages
Yes it is very "unique". In a bad way.
#17
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:19
Weiser_Cain
-
- Members
- 1 945 messages
I liked it, I like it a hell of a lot more than planet scanning.
#18
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:23
Mr. MannlyMan
-
- Members
- 2 150 messages
lolwut666 wrote...
The problem with the aim is that you had to be on terrain of the same level or lower to hit the targets. If they were lower than you, you can't hit them.
Maneuver into a position so you can hit them. Most people acknowledge the Mako has a slight learning curve. BTW, you CAN hit objects that are slightly lower than the plane of your vehicle. The reason for this design was because the turret would have had to have gone through the front of the tank in order to aim downwards. The Hammerhead has the same limitation when it's on the ground, but it's harder to notice because the missiles don't fly in a straight path; they arc. This would be better if you could actually choose which targets to aim for.
Also, if they are too close, for some reason the Mako's guns can't hit them, even though it looks like they're perfectly aimed at them.
Tanks aren't designed for close combat.
That's why you either back up a bit or you get out on foot. Hammerhead has same problem (this actually happens in most games).As for the handling, I got the hang of it eventually, but when I was starting out with Mass Effect, I fell on lava lots of times because the Mako swerves too hard.
Eventually? Tight handling is something you should be able to pick up on fairly quickly.
#19
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:24
Lunatic LK47
-
- Members
- 2 024 messages
snfonseka wrote...
Yes it is very "unique". In a bad way.
Emphasis on this.
#20
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:30
Fiery Phoenix
-
- Members
- 18 952 messages
The Mako itself was fine, notwithstanding some remarkably poor physics. For the most part, the problem was the ridiculous terrain, as opposed to the vehicle.
#21
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:33
Mr. MannlyMan
-
- Members
- 2 150 messages
Lunatic LK47 wrote...
Yeah, Halo's Warthog had better driving controls than the Mako (i.e. Up on analog stick= Always drive forward, Down= always reverse."). The fact that "any direction=forward" is as stupid as saying "It's perfectly fine for your car to randomly reverse when making U-Turns despite the fact your transmission is set on 'Drive.'"
The Mako is a tank with a free turret. The Warthog is not. Halo's Scorpion tank would be a better comparison (and it can also go forward when the analog stick is being held down, which makes it as stupid as the Mako apparently).
If the Mako couldn't strafe while shooting at stuff, it'd be a pretty useless vehicle; just like the Scorpion would suck if you always drove towards where you were aiming. Is that not obvious?
Edit: I really think many of the people who rag on the Mako have just been indoctrinated into using the Warthog in Halo multiplayer (or similar designs). The Hammerhead is like Bioware's version of the Ghost, which could be why a lot of people think it's easier to handle.
Modifié par Mr. MannlyMan, 27 avril 2011 - 06:39 .
#22
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:33
Mr.House
-
- Members
- 23 338 messages
The MAKO gave me 5% of my bugs in ME.
#23
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:35
MrFob
-
- Members
- 5 412 messages
Lunatic LK47 wrote...
snfonseka wrote...
Yes it is very "unique". In a bad way.
Emphasis on this.
Wait a minute, you guys mean that you really liked it and thus want such vehicles to be more ubiquitous in video games, right?
[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie] Sorry, couldn't resist.
#24
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:36
CroGamer002
-
- Members
- 20 672 messages
AdmiralCheez wrote...
As far as unique features go, it was a pretty boring one. And frustrating as hell.
Pretty much this.
#25
Posté 27 avril 2011 - 06:39
lolwut666
-
- Members
- 1 470 messages
@Mr. MannlyMan
No need to be such a Mako apologist.
There were plenty of times when I wasn't even that much above the target, yet I still couldn't hit.
As for the close-range combat, in pretty much every game with tanks, when you shoot someone at close range, at least they're hit. You're not supposed to be that close, but the gun works all the same. When you're too close with the Mako and you fire the cannon, you can actually see it explode close to the enemy, but it inflicts *no damage*. It's like there is an invisible barrier around the Mako that nulls damage.
As for the handling, that's ridiculous. Any decent game with vehicles will have more intuitive controls than that.
If you like the Mako that's fine. Just don't pretend it's not flawed all the way to hell, or try to blame the players.
No need to be such a Mako apologist.
There were plenty of times when I wasn't even that much above the target, yet I still couldn't hit.
As for the close-range combat, in pretty much every game with tanks, when you shoot someone at close range, at least they're hit. You're not supposed to be that close, but the gun works all the same. When you're too close with the Mako and you fire the cannon, you can actually see it explode close to the enemy, but it inflicts *no damage*. It's like there is an invisible barrier around the Mako that nulls damage.
As for the handling, that's ridiculous. Any decent game with vehicles will have more intuitive controls than that.
If you like the Mako that's fine. Just don't pretend it's not flawed all the way to hell, or try to blame the players.
