617 réponses à ce sujet

[Walker White]

Nathan Redgrave wrote...

Walker White wrote...

If you put enough powers into the character build, there is no need for loot.  And loot (other than scanning) makes no sense in a sci fi setting with fabrication plants and 3D printers.

What, you mean if I went digging around in random crates and trash cans in the Star Wars universe I wouldn't find random caches of blasters, grenades, etc. all over the place?

...

I mean that you cannot resell them; no one wants to buy them.  They can print a shiny new one for cheaper than it costs you to pay for the fuel to pull the items out of the gravity well in your shuttle.

It makes sense to carry it around in mission if you are lacking a weapon.  Just not to take it home to the Normandy and sell it.  But they have already said that ME3 will allow you to pick up enemy weapons in mission, so that's all good.

[GodWood]

darknoon5 wrote...
@Terrok K: You proved his point that you're a hypocrite. You rage and insult him back, but then report him? Something doesn't seem right there. I also doubt he would've blown off the handle if you were less condescending and insulted other genre's less. (I still can't believe that whole "RPG's take more skill then shooter" line:pinched:)

I don't know what you're talking about, I saw no rage or insults in Terror K's post.

[bald man in a boat]

Terror_K wrote...

Go ahead... just prove my point more and more by showcasing the type of people BioWare are bringing into their circle these days.

Oh, and btw, if you'd bother to actually read what I'd said regarding your so-called claims, I said I was done with Dragon Age and the Dragon Age IP as a whole, not with BioWare entirely. I said that how ME3 turns out will determine whether I stick with BioWare beyond that or not.

Beyond that, like anybody who sprouts terms like "elitist", "hater" and "troll" at the drop of a hat you're not worth my time, so I won't bother responding to anything else.

Oh... and Reported, btw.

U mad bro? 

[Ahriman]

Walker White wrote...
If you put enough powers into the character build, there is no need for loot.  And loot (other than scanning) makes no sense in a sci fi setting with fabrication plants and 3D printers.

But there are still factories in ME universe and if I'm not mistaken 3d printing works only for small items.

[SalsaDMA]

lazuli wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Walker White wrote...

My custom choice of powers and abilities represent my character, not the stats.  Point me to an FPS that has the range of customizable powers that ME does.

At the top of my head: Borderlands

Each character has one power and a collection of passive abilities to manipulate that single power.  That hardly counts, unless they changed this in some DLC.  I quit playing that game when I realized that PC multiplayer was never going to get fixed.

an entire skill tree for each vcharacter with multiple paths of progression where you can dump multiple points in each skill when you unlock them doesn't count?

This debate is pointless when you start making up bollock statements like that.

[Nathan Redgrave]

Regarding skill required for RPGs vs. skill required for shooters:

I'd like to mention that I just played through Half-Life 2, Episode One, and Episode Two in my brother's copy of The Orange Box over the last week, and on the whole it was harder than pretty much every RPG I've ever played, Eastern and Western, combined. Believe it or not, a gameplay style based on action, reflex, and quick wit can be harder than one that leaves the action, reflex, and quick wit to a computer while you just make sure you have enough XP and high-tier equipment to get by. Really, it's true!

"Point and shoot" would be an adequate summation if all of your targets just stood there all derpy-derp, but they don't. Just sayin'. You need skills, just an entirely different skillset.

Y'see, when you try to say things like this, you really do look genre-elitist.

bald man in a boat wrote...

words

Wee bit over the line, dude. Even when I occasionally rant about people being genre-snobbish, it's with a calm demeanor and a totally disinterested expression on--you know, out here in Realityland where nobody actually gives a damn if someone is WRONG on the Internet (*gasp, shock, horror!*).

[darknoon5]

darknoon5 wrote...
@Terrok K: You proved his point that you're
a hypocrite. You rage and insult him back, but then report him?
Something doesn't seem right there. I also doubt he would've blown off
the handle if you were less condescending and insulted other genre's
less. (I still can't believe that whole "RPG's take more skill then
shooter" line[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/pinched.png[/smilie]

Beyond that, like anybody who sprouts terms like "elitist", "hater" and "troll" at the drop of a hat you're not worth my time

Also:

Go ahead... just prove my point more and more by showcasing the type of
people BioWare are bringing into their circle these days.

Oh, and btw, if you'd bother to actually read what I'd said

Beyond that, like anybody who sprouts terms like "elitist", "hater" and "troll" at the drop of a hat you're not worth my time

Pretty sure that is insulting. (also sorry your post dissapeared Godwood, these forums are abosluetely terrible sometimes<_<)

Modifié par darknoon5, 07 mai 2011 - 01:53 .

[lazuli]

SalsaDMA wrote...

an entire skill tree for each vcharacter with multiple paths of progression where you can dump multiple points in each skill when you unlock them doesn't count?

This debate is pointless when you start making up bollock statements like that.

My point was that tons of passive abilities with proc chances hardly seem to have the same depth as different active abilities, each with unique effects.  In Borderlands, a lot of your abilities are left to chance.

I guess I put more value on active abilities than passive traits.

[bald man in a boat]

^ mind your own business Nathan ^

[lazuli]

GodWood wrote...

darknoon5 wrote...
@Terrok K: You proved his point that you're a hypocrite. You rage and insult him back, but then report him? Something doesn't seem right there. I also doubt he would've blown off the handle if you were less condescending and insulted other genre's less. (I still can't believe that whole "RPG's take more skill then shooter" line:pinched:)

I don't know what you're talking about, I saw no rage or insults in Terror K's post.

It's perfectly reasonable to read "dumbed down" as an admittedly indirect insult.

[Nathan Redgrave]

Walker White wrote...

But they have already said that ME3 will allow you to pick up enemy weapons in mission, so that's all good.

We don't know whether that means "loot" or the typical case of an action game hero being able to pick up an enemy's weapon and temporarily use it.

As long as it doesn't involve weapon degradation, I'm okay with either option. Although if there's loot, that list had damn well better scroll faster than a slug on tranquilizers, because I am not putting up with that crap a second time.

[Da Mecca]

I'm pretty sure they meant pick them up to use in that fight, not to keep forever.

But who knows.

[theelementslayer]

They said they were improving them, why be worried. Improvemnet I usually think as a good thing... Meh maybe the word has changed, I dont know.

And for shooters that require skill Id say go play FarCry 2, that has some skill requirement. Do I think shooters are easier then RPGs, sure cause I have quick reflexes and good eye/hand coordination. Am I going to say you are dumb for playing shooters, no, alot of them require some sort of skill. FarCry 2 you have to set up ambushes and all. Crysis 1 had lots of areas where you had to be sneaky.

But whatever my rant is over, people need to stop taking everything Chirstina, or Casey or someone from BioWare says, spinning it around, taking a dump on it and then using their opinion as a basis for fact. The games not out yet, once the game is out then you will have the actual facts

And sidenote, I found ME2s leveling up way more rewarding then ME1s.

[Nathan Redgrave]

bald man in a boat wrote...

^ mind your own business Nathan ^

When you post on a public forum, you waive any right you ever had to "your own business." If you want an uninterrupted heart-to-heart, you have PMs for that.

Short answer:

Um, no.

[Terror_K]

bald man in a boat wrote...

U mad bro? 

Only at what BioWare, Mass Effect, the RPG genre and these forums are becoming as time goes by. Though that is my first reported post since I've been here. It's pretty hard to actually insult me and I'm willing to let a fair amount slide, particularly if the poster attacks the points I make more than me personally. But that was just downright visceral.

Incidentally, I have quite the games library of shooters, and enjoy them a lot. In fact, some of my favourite times in video games have been in shooters. I also currently have pre-orders for Duke Nukem Forever and Battlefield 3 at the moment, and am considering even looking into Brink. I realise that shooters do require a great degree of skill and quick reactions, and even tactical thought, particuarly with multiplayer ones. But they are a different kettle of fish than RPGs, and I go to my RPGs for a different experience than I go to my RPGs for.

I don't play Mass Effect to play a shooter, I play it to play an RPG, just like I don't go to Unreal Tournament, Team Fortress 2, Gears of War, Half-LIfe 2 or Call of Duty for roleplaying and RPG mechanics. I like all kinds of genres, including puzzle games, platform games, RTS's, etc. but that doesn't mean I want Mass Effect to become them. I go to Starcraft for Starcraft, Unreal Tournament for Unreal Tournament, and Mass Effect for Mass Effect. I don't go there for Gears of War.

[bald man in a boat]

<_<

Modifié par bald man in a boat, 07 mai 2011 - 02:13 .

[lazuli]

Terror_K wrote...
I don't play Mass Effect to play a shooter, I play it to play an RPG, just like I don't go to Unreal Tournament, Team Fortress 2, Gears of War, Half-LIfe 2 or Call of Duty for roleplaying and RPG mechanics. I like all kinds of genres, including puzzle games, platform games, RTS's, etc. but that doesn't mean I want Mass Effect to become them. I go to Starcraft for Starcraft, Unreal Tournament for Unreal Tournament, and Mass Effect for Mass Effect. I don't go there for Gears of War.

Mass Effect 1's combat system was broken and unsatisfactory.  Bioware effectively admitted this when they made ME2.  You're clinging to an aberration and basing your interpretation of the entire series off of its flaws.

[Walker White]

Nathan Redgrave wrote...

We don't know whether that means "loot" or the typical case of an action game hero being able to pick up an enemy's weapon and temporarily use it.

I am assuming the latter.  If you want to "loot" it, scan the sucker and upload the specs to the Normandy.

[Walker White]

Wizz wrote...

Walker White wrote...
If you put enough powers into the character build, there is no need for loot.  And loot (other than scanning) makes no sense in a sci fi setting with fabrication plants and 3D printers.

But there are still factories in ME universe and if I'm not mistaken 3d printing works only for small items.

Sure, for ships and things like that.  But if I can pick it up, and it is mass produced (e.g. not art made of some exact material that cannot be printed), then it can be printed.

[Nathan Redgrave]

Terror_K wrote...

Only at what BioWare, Mass Effect, the RPG genre and these forums are becoming as time goes by. Though that is my first reported post since I've been here. It's pretty hard to actually insult me and I'm willing to let a fair amount slide, particularly if the poster attacks the points I make more than me personally. But that was just downright visceral.

Incidentally, I have quite the games library of shooters, and enjoy them a lot. In fact, some of my favourite times in video games have been in shooters. I also currently have pre-orders for Duke Nukem Forever and Battlefield 3 at the moment, and am considering even looking into Brink. I realise that shooters do require a great degree of skill and quick reactions, and even tactical thought, particuarly with multiplayer ones. But they are a different kettle of fish than RPGs, and I go to my RPGs for a different experience than I go to my RPGs for.

I don't play Mass Effect to play a shooter, I play it to play an RPG, just like I don't go to Unreal Tournament, Team Fortress 2, Gears of War, Half-LIfe 2 or Call of Duty for roleplaying and RPG mechanics. I like all kinds of genres, including puzzle games, platform games, RTS's, etc. but that doesn't mean I want Mass Effect to become them. I go to Starcraft for Starcraft, Unreal Tournament for Unreal Tournament, and Mass Effect for Mass Effect. I don't go there for Gears of War.

So, uh, despite your level of experience with the shooter genre, neither Mass Effect 1's headless-chicken syndrome, its inventory-scroll-lag syndrome, its incredibly-samey-moonbuggy syndrome, or its huzzah-here-we-are-in-the-same-three-room-warehouse-yet-again-syndrome (actually quite a bit worse than DA2, in my humblest opinion, but hey, what do I know) bother you? The idea of replacing headless-chicken-syndrome with bona-fide shooter combat bothers you more than headless-chicken syndrome?

...

Terror, if you're not elitist, then I just do not understand your motivation on this point. Especially the headless-chicken syndrome, which sucked no matter how you sliced it.

[Walker White]

theelementslayer wrote...

They said they were improving them, why be worried. Improvemnet I usually think as a good thing... Meh maybe the word has changed, I dont know.

There has always been, and will always be grognards.  I finally let go and chose to accept it years ago after seeing so many changes in the genre.

[Phaelducan]

The criticisms on the original point are misguided. There ARE pointless stats in any shooting RPG. Accuracy as a stat is absurd when I can manually aim the gun and pull the trigger. Fallout 3/New Vegas is a great example of this. Why on earth would you ever need to put a single point in your Gun/Energy Weapons skill if you can just play outside of VATS and shoot the thing in the head yourself.

I imagine the mechanics in ME3 have similar "behind the scenes" dice rolls which are just plain outdated and pointless. There is no Armor class, there is no Thac0. You move your own combat reticle and shoot things yourself. That was the same in ME1. As such, an accuracy "stat" would be wasted in any shooter RPG these days, as you simple don't have to rely on the software to calculate your precision for you.

As to the overall trend of the forums, Terror_K I think it's far more on the heads of posters such as yourself who take every opportunity to criticize and lampoon Bioware for development decisions that *gasp* FAR more Bioware fans like and appreciate then don't. Give it up already, ME2 was incredibly successful, fun, slick, engaging, and critically lauded. It insults everyone here when the same tired rhetoric is repeated ad infinitum about how bad the direction of the company is.

Most of us like ME2 and DA2, and even if there are elements that we did like from ME1 and DA1 it does not negate enjoying the other games as well. Please stop this endless and pointless tirade against the newer products. If you don't like them, just don't play them and move on. There are other games out there.

[darknoon5]

Terror_K wrote...

bald man in a boat wrote...

U mad bro? 

Only at what BioWare, Mass Effect, the RPG genre and these forums are becoming as time goes by.

Basically, some people are actually looking forward to ME3 and enjoyed ME2, therefore the forums suck.

The forums are no lower quality then before. The only annoying thing is the mangiraffafedogs, and butthurt fans afraid of change, but they've been here a long time and will so, despite their constant claims that they are "done with Bioware" and "never buying another bioware game ever!"

Also, as far as I'm concerned Mass effect 2 is probably bioware's best title since Kotor. They're, if anything, getting better now.

[Terror_K]

lazuli wrote...

Mass Effect 1's combat system was broken and unsatisfactory.  Bioware effectively admitted this when they made ME2.  You're clinging to an aberration and basing your interpretation of the entire series off of its flaws.

Again, I've already admitted several times that from a purely combat point of view, ME2's variant is superior and it was actually a good thing to change shooting from stat-based to skill-based. However, as I've said several times also, that was no reason for many of the other RPG elements to go the way of the dodo or be so simplified and automated. Making the combat skill-based, improving AI and cover mechanics, etc. did improve the combat because these were things directly related to it. Removing customisation and choice, automating upgrades, culling the available skills and narrowing their focus, etc. had next to nothing to do with combat directly, and so in no way did their removal improve it.

Beyond that, ME2's combat is very simplistic, and to be honest beyond its cinematic presentation and writing I really don't get how ME2 was so lauded. The RPG factors are too weak to make it a good RPG, and the TPS factors are too basic and simple to really make it a good TPS. I suppose many would ask, "how was ME1 any different?" and I personally feel the answer is that ME1 was never really trying to be as much a TPS as ME2, was more different and original and had an undefinable X-factor that ME2 lacks that made it much more of an experience and more than the sum of its parts. ME2 is just too much of "a game" to raise above itself, and to me comes across as a little half-assed and bland overall, not quite being rich enough on either side to be truly satisfying and only really being propped up by its cinematic presentation, characters and writing. It also doesn't help that the game treats me like a child either. In some ways ME1 may have been a bit like a boring tech manual, but it's better than ME2's children's pop-up book approach, IMO.

Phaelducan wrote...

As to the overall trend of the forums, Terror_K I think it's far more on the heads of posters such as yourself who take every opportunity to criticize and lampoon Bioware for development decisions that *gasp* FAR more Bioware fans like and appreciate then don't. Give it up already, ME2 was incredibly successful, fun, slick, engaging, and critically lauded. It insults everyone here when the same tired rhetoric is repeated ad infinitum about how bad the direction of the company is.

That's only because many of the old posters from the old pre-EA forums rarely post any more and have probably gone, and BioWare's branching out has brought in a new generation of BioWare fanboys whose lips seem to barely leave the company's butt for anything other than defending it against those who still remain and point out the slippery slope the company has been on lately.

Most of us like ME2 and DA2, and even if there are elements that we did like from ME1 and DA1 it does not negate enjoying the other games as well. Please stop this endless and pointless tirade against the newer products. If you don't like them, just don't play them and move on. There are other games out there.

Most people here like DA2?

Okay... I'll fully admit that ME2 is a very popular game, and quite a large amount of people love it and even think it's mostly better than the original for the most part. But DA2? Seriously? Have you even been to the Dragon Age side of these forums?

Modifié par Terror_K, 07 mai 2011 - 02:37 .

[Phaelducan]

I'll still pick Kotor as their best-ever title, but I'm a sucker for Star-Wars that doesn't suck (I'm looking at you, Episode II).

I also disagree that better or worse is a useful descriptor when talking about CRPG games made a decade ago. Those were great, and it was then. These are great, and they are now.

Change happens, it's only our own stubborn refusal to accept it that leads to frustration. ME2 is a great game.

Edit: @Terror_K

"Beyond that, ME2's combat is very simplistic, and to be honest beyond its cinematic presentation and writing I really don't get how ME2 was so lauded."

Fine, and you never will. Arguing about it wastes everyone's time. It WAS lauded, and by a ton of people (hence 96 on metacritic).

Modifié par Phaelducan, 07 mai 2011 - 02:34 .