75 réponses à ce sujet

[Schneidend]

Dave666 wrote...

I'll grant you that in ME:2 the weapons have different visuals and different sound effects, but things like damage and fire rate are just stats which you have dismissed, hell even ammo capacity is another type of stat.

ME:1's weapons did have differences though, how many shots before overheating?  How accurate are they?  How much damage do they do?

I'm not and never have stated that ME:1 was better than ME:2, I prefer ME:1 but thats a subjective opinion.

The point being made is that, in ME1, the only difference between Assault Rifle 1 and Assault Rifle 2 was a stat increase. Once you had 2, there was no reason to ever use 1 again unless you were purposefully nerfing yourself to enhance the difficulty.

In ME2, you instead have Assault Rifle X and Assault Rifle Y which have different but balanced stats, and also play differently. X is a fully automatic weapon with steady DPS, while Y is a three-round burst fire weapon with greater accuracy and stopping power. Even if the community at large generally prefers Y, X is still a very viable option.

[Clonedzero]

Schneidend wrote...

Dave666 wrote...

I'll grant you that in ME:2 the weapons have different visuals and different sound effects, but things like damage and fire rate are just stats which you have dismissed, hell even ammo capacity is another type of stat.

ME:1's weapons did have differences though, how many shots before overheating?  How accurate are they?  How much damage do they do?

I'm not and never have stated that ME:1 was better than ME:2, I prefer ME:1 but thats a subjective opinion.

The point being made is that, in ME1, the only difference between Assault Rifle 1 and Assault Rifle 2 was a stat increase. Once you had 2, there was no reason to ever use 1 again unless you were purposefully nerfing yourself to enhance the difficulty.

In ME2, you instead have Assault Rifle X and Assault Rifle Y which have different but balanced stats, and also play differently. X is a fully automatic weapon with steady DPS, while Y is a three-round burst fire weapon with greater accuracy and stopping power. Even if the community at large generally prefers Y, X is still a very viable option.

exactly.

and i like assault rifle X!

[88mphSlayer]

MGS4 did it right with the Drebin Store, that game had tons of guns and they all were useful in some way or another, many were highly customizable and suitable for different play styles or situations, and many weapons and modifications had to be found by exploring every map fully before moving on to the next but once you found said modification/weapon it was always available from then on from the drebin store, you could fully customize everything in combat too rather than needing to goto an in-game console

[SalsaDMA]

InvaderErl wrote...

There were 4 guns in ME1. Pistol/Shotgun/Sniper Rifle/ Assault Rifle.

That was it, every weapon in every class operated exactly the same aside from a completely linear stat progression system. Additionally there were only 2 models for every weapon class and a hell of a ton of basic reskins.

That's not really acurate.

There were pretty big differences between the brands of manufactorers. Some of them specialized in different settings. I seem to recall Hahne Kadar sniper rifles were more acurate, for example, but had lower damage output.

If you lump all the weapons into one group, it's clear you never paid enough attention to be able to tell a difference between ME2 weapons either, save for the bigger comsetic change of how it looked.

[SalsaDMA]

Schneidend wrote...

The point being made is that, in ME1, the only difference between Assault Rifle 1 and Assault Rifle 2 was a stat increase. Once you had 2, there was no reason to ever use 1 again unless you were purposefully nerfing yourself to enhance the difficulty.

In ME2, you instead have Assault Rifle X and Assault Rifle Y which have different but balanced stats, and also play differently. X is a fully automatic weapon with steady DPS, while Y is a three-round burst fire weapon with greater accuracy and stopping power. Even if the community at large generally prefers Y, X is still a very viable option.

Inacurate.

Going from Armax AR III to Armax AR IV in ME1 is the same as going from AR damage upgrade 2 to AR damage upgrade 3 in ME2 (in generic terms, not actual numbers.)

Going from Hahne Kadar AR I to Armax AR I in ME1 is the same as going from Avenger to Vindicator in ME2.

Difference being, ofc, that on top of this, ME1 allowed you weapon mods.

Modifié par SalsaDMA, 16 mai 2011 - 05:39 .

[Nohvarr]

SalsaDMA wrote...


That's not really acurate.

There were pretty big differences between the brands of manufactorers. Some of them specialized in different settings. I seem to recall Hahne Kadar sniper rifles were more acurate, for example, but had lower damage output.

But the actual firing characteristics weren't that different. If I transfer my mods between the various weapons they all fire the same. As I pointed out earlier, firing an Avenger is different from firing a Vindicator or a Mattock in ME 2. With the Mattock and Vindicator I tend to aim for the head, whereas with the Avenger I just aim for center mass. When firing the Mattock I tend to pick my shots even more so than I do with the Vindicator. With the Vindicator I tend to be a little looser cause I know it fires a three shot burst, and that I'm likely to hit my target with something as long as I'm fairly close.

[SalsaDMA]

Nohvarr wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...


That's not really acurate.

There were pretty big differences between the brands of manufactorers. Some of them specialized in different settings. I seem to recall Hahne Kadar sniper rifles were more acurate, for example, but had lower damage output.

But the actual firing characteristics weren't that different. If I transfer my mods between the various weapons they all fire the same. As I pointed out earlier, firing an Avenger is different from firing a Vindicator or a Mattock in ME 2. With the Mattock and Vindicator I tend to aim for the head, whereas with the Avenger I just aim for center mass. When firing the Mattock I tend to pick my shots even more so than I do with the Vindicator. With the Vindicator I tend to be a little looser cause I know it fires a three shot burst, and that I'm likely to hit my target with something as long as I'm fairly close.

They sure were different. Depending on heat capability of the weapon you could either be playing with a 'sprayer' or one where you had to do 'tap-firing' in order to avoid overheating. Overheating in the heat of battle (hur hur) could spell instant doom sometimes, so the difference of use was certianly there.

Edit: and the ME1 system had a glaring omission of hit areas, so aiming at anywhere but the center didn't make sense in that game. Hitting a target on the toe was as effective as hitting it in the head.

Modifié par SalsaDMA, 16 mai 2011 - 05:43 .

[Nohvarr]

SalsaDMA wrote...

They sure were different. Depending on heat capability of the weapon you could either be playing with a 'sprayer' or one where you had to do 'tap-firing' in order to avoid overheating. Overheating in the heat of battle (hur hur) could spell instant doom sometimes, so the difference of use was certianly there.

I want you to note that you said 'You had to do 'tap-firing' in your playthrough. That means that one AR fired exactly the same as the rest of them. If I hold the trigger down on any gun in ME 1, it fires in the same manner. Now I can tap fire an Avenger in ME 2, it's not as effective as the Vindicator's burst fire but it helps. So yeah, if you want the feel of ME 1 just use the Avenger and tap fire to your hearts content.

As I said elsewhere, the the improved weapon stats for each version of a gun in ME 1 may as well have been a linear upgrade because that's all the progression amounted to in the end. You had one AR that you could choose to 'tap-fire', that got better as you 'Bought' new upgrades.

[Fixers0]

The problem with the weapons and equipment in general in Mass effect 2 is that there isn't an ecenomy or culture involved, And while i do like change to less weapons with more diferences between them, but right now its just too static.

[SalsaDMA]

Nohvarr wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

They sure were different. Depending on heat capability of the weapon you could either be playing with a 'sprayer' or one where you had to do 'tap-firing' in order to avoid overheating. Overheating in the heat of battle (hur hur) could spell instant doom sometimes, so the difference of use was certianly there.

I want you to note that you said 'You had to do 'tap-firing' in your playthrough. That means that one AR fired exactly the same as the rest of them. If I hold the trigger down on any gun in ME 1, it fires in the same manner. Now I can tap fire an Avenger in ME 2, it's not as effective as the Vindicator's burst fire but it helps. So yeah, if you want the feel of ME 1 just use the Avenger and tap fire to your hearts content.

As I said elsewhere, the the improved weapon stats for each version of a gun in ME 1 may as well have been a linear upgrade because that's all the progression amounted to in the end. You had one AR that you could choose to 'tap-fire', that got better as you 'Bought' new upgrades.

No. Being forced to use 2 different ways of firing the weapons to be able to use them effectively does not constitue them being the same, no matter how much you try and convince yourself of it.

[Clonedzero]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Schneidend wrote...

The point being made is that, in ME1, the only difference between Assault Rifle 1 and Assault Rifle 2 was a stat increase. Once you had 2, there was no reason to ever use 1 again unless you were purposefully nerfing yourself to enhance the difficulty.

In ME2, you instead have Assault Rifle X and Assault Rifle Y which have different but balanced stats, and also play differently. X is a fully automatic weapon with steady DPS, while Y is a three-round burst fire weapon with greater accuracy and stopping power. Even if the community at large generally prefers Y, X is still a very viable option.

Inacurate.

Going from Armax AR III to Armax AR IV in ME1 is the same as going from AR damage upgrade 2 to AR damage upgrade 3 in ME2 (in generic terms, not actual numbers.)

Going from Hahne Kadar AR I to Armax AR I in ME1 is the same as going from Avenger to Vindicator in ME2.

Difference being, ofc, that on top of this, ME1 allowed you weapon mods.

no. because you couldnt tell the difference between the two if you just shot it at the wall.
they had different stats but were exactly the same in how they operated.

[SalsaDMA]

Clonedzero wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Schneidend wrote...

The point being made is that, in ME1, the only difference between Assault Rifle 1 and Assault Rifle 2 was a stat increase. Once you had 2, there was no reason to ever use 1 again unless you were purposefully nerfing yourself to enhance the difficulty.

In ME2, you instead have Assault Rifle X and Assault Rifle Y which have different but balanced stats, and also play differently. X is a fully automatic weapon with steady DPS, while Y is a three-round burst fire weapon with greater accuracy and stopping power. Even if the community at large generally prefers Y, X is still a very viable option.

Inacurate.

Going from Armax AR III to Armax AR IV in ME1 is the same as going from AR damage upgrade 2 to AR damage upgrade 3 in ME2 (in generic terms, not actual numbers.)

Going from Hahne Kadar AR I to Armax AR I in ME1 is the same as going from Avenger to Vindicator in ME2.

Difference being, ofc, that on top of this, ME1 allowed you weapon mods.

no. because you couldnt tell the difference between the two if you just shot it at the wall.
they had different stats but were exactly the same in how they operated.

I disagree.

[Adhin]

I agree 100% with Jav on all this stuff. I didn't, nore have I ever liked or supported the mindless dmg/stat scale ME1 imployed, or DAO/2 use. It's a horrible, horrible system to base anything on.

That said ME2 definitely had way to few weapons, 2 per catagory (not counting the 3 'advanced' versions). Very weak selection but that's not to say the system they had going was bad. It's damn good and worked how they wanted it too I might add. People got attached to stuff even with that low number of weapons, now if they add on all the DLC weapons + some extra, and have each one moddable... well ****.

See the issue with ME1 wasn't the stat change, and being able to mod to shift stats is a great thing. It's the feel, they all literally felt the same. You basically had 4 weapons you could mod which is half what ME2 had. Tripple that and add in more meaningful mods that physically alter the appearance for ME3? All I gadda say to that is a censored **** yeah!

[Nashiktal]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Clonedzero wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

Schneidend wrote...

The point being made is that, in ME1, the only difference between Assault Rifle 1 and Assault Rifle 2 was a stat increase. Once you had 2, there was no reason to ever use 1 again unless you were purposefully nerfing yourself to enhance the difficulty.

In ME2, you instead have Assault Rifle X and Assault Rifle Y which have different but balanced stats, and also play differently. X is a fully automatic weapon with steady DPS, while Y is a three-round burst fire weapon with greater accuracy and stopping power. Even if the community at large generally prefers Y, X is still a very viable option.

Inacurate.

Going from Armax AR III to Armax AR IV in ME1 is the same as going from AR damage upgrade 2 to AR damage upgrade 3 in ME2 (in generic terms, not actual numbers.)

Going from Hahne Kadar AR I to Armax AR I in ME1 is the same as going from Avenger to Vindicator in ME2.

Difference being, ofc, that on top of this, ME1 allowed you weapon mods.

no. because you couldnt tell the difference between the two if you just shot it at the wall.
they had different stats but were exactly the same in how they operated.

I disagree.

I have to agree with the others. The only difference between weapons were slight stat changes. Those stats, however, didn't matter outside of damage if you leveled up in that specific weapon. A fully grown shep who specced in snipers will feel no difference between snipers by virtue of level and mods.

However in ME2 the weapons feel different because of *mechanics* instead of stats. All the weapons in ME1 however use the same *mechanics.*

In me2, even if you fully upgrade all the weapons, they still handle differently by virtue of their mechanics. This allows the player to reliably choose their weapon of choice based on how it handles instead of vague stats that may or may not matter depending on how you leveled your shep. An adept can reliably use the carnifex just like any other shep, no matter how s/he builds their character.

[SNascimento]

As people already said, ME1 had 4 waepons.
.
ME2 have a lot of them. It's hard to find a game with more than 20+ unique weapons.

[Someone With Mass]

I'm happy with just ME2's amount of weapons, and ME3 will have several new ones, so that's a bonus. Plus, I can put camouflage on them and mod them with several different pieces. I'm more than satisfied at this point.

[Tony Gunslinger]

It's easier to design a gun and alter it with +10 accuracy and -7 damage than designing two different guns with completely different recoil, ammo count, shield/barrier and armor bonuses, and rate of fire while still making both of them competitive. There was no comparison graph in ME2 because it's hard to chart burst-firing vs. continuous-firing vs. shield vs. armor vs distance modifers vs. recoil vs. ammo capacity all at once. And to say that ME2 guns were simplified, more work was done on them than ME1:

ME1’s Weapons:
4 gun types x 2 cosmetic skins
Grenades*
TOTAL WEAPON DESIGNS: 9

ME2’s Weapons (excluding DLC)
2 Pistols
2 SMGs
3 Shotguns
3 Sniper Rifles
3 Assault Rifles
5 Heavy Weapons
TOTAL WEAPON DESIGNS: 18
(WITH DLC: 26)

* added ME1 grenades because I'm afraid that they may get jealous of ME2 heavy weapons.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to seeing more guns and being able to mod in ME3 while still retaining their individuality and competitiveness.

[Someone With Mass]

If you include DLC and heavy weapons, then you have like 28 weapons in ME2 to play around with. Add that to ME3, which will have even more weapons and you can satisfy even the craziest gun nut out there.

[SalsaDMA]

Someone With Mass wrote...

If you include DLC and heavy weapons, then you have like 28 weapons in ME2 to play around with. Add that to ME3, which will have even more weapons and you can satisfy even the craziest gun nut out there.

Heavy weapons were definately a vast improvement in the arsenal, and not really comparable to anything in the ME1 arsenal.

The regular stock ME2 weapons were just the same as ME1 weapons, though.

One game I was playing around with an assault rifle that was a monster on single hits, but overheated fast, so I had to keep shots to single shots. In this regard it performed like the Mattock in ME2. Another game I had an AR that did overall lower damage but could spray shots out like no tommorrow, in this regard it was like the geth pulse rifle. And then there were the choices in between, both in ME1 and ME2.

Graphically there were more models in ME2, but the gameplay differences weren't that different from ME1 outside of looks.

Edit: if anything, the difference were inhow the engine enforced your usage. In ME2 it was hardcoded by the devs. In ME1 it was softcoded by making your weapon overheat and thus forcing a prolonged un-usable period if you went too far outside of the apropriated firing patterns.

ME1 gave you options in this regard, ME2 took away options.

Modifié par SalsaDMA, 16 mai 2011 - 07:30 .

[DieBySword]

Tony Gunslinger wrote...

It's easier to design a gun and alter it with +10 accuracy and -7 damage than designing two different guns with completely different recoil, ammo count, shield/barrier and armor bonuses, and rate of fire while still making both of them competitive. There was no comparison graph in ME2 because it's hard to chart burst-firing vs. continuous-firing vs. shield vs. armor vs distance modifers vs. recoil vs. ammo capacity all at once. And to say that ME2 guns were simplified, more work was done on them than ME1:

Noone saying they were symplified, they work differently from ME1 guns but in total nothing actualy changed except in ME2 they are limited to working in a static way when in ME1 we could change how some weapon worked depending on mods. You can get 2 shots with the sniper rifle in ME1 or you can mod it with an explosion and incinerate mod so its one shot kills anything but overheats from 1 shot or add the cooling mods for extended use.

ME1’s Weapons:
4 gun types x 2 cosmetic skins
Grenades*
TOTAL WEAPON DESIGNS: 9

ME2’s Weapons (excluding DLC)
2 Pistols
2 SMGs
3 Shotguns
3 Sniper Rifles
3 Assault Rifles
5 Heavy Weapons
TOTAL WEAPON DESIGNS: 18
(WITH DLC: 26)

* added ME1 grenades because I'm afraid that they may get jealous of ME2 heavy weapons.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to seeing more guns and being able to mod in ME3 while still retaining their individuality and competitiveness.

We are comparing ME1&2 weapons so granades,heavy weapons and smg (small AR supstitute) shouldnt be counted. In ME1 we have 4 clases AR have 3 distinct different model design, the shotguns have 3 distinct design, snipers and pistols have 2 diferent designs that gives us 10 guns and ME2 gives us what 11, 15 if you count heavy weapons and 26 with dlc.

Modifié par DieBySword, 16 mai 2011 - 08:03 .

[Lunatic LK47]

DieBySword wrote...


In ME1 we have 4 clases AR have 3 distinct different model design, the shotguns have 3 distinct design, snipers and pistols have 2 diferent designs that gives us 10 guns and ME2 gives us what 11, 15 if you count heavy weapons and 26 with dlc.

Uh, no. Tony's assessment is more accurate. I can tell my models well.

[Minister of Sound]

javierabegazo wrote...

Dave666 wrote...

javierabegazo wrote...

For me, 100 shotguns that function the exact same, save for minor stat increases, will always be inferior to 4 shotguns that function differently. I think for a sci fi IP, ME2 took things in a better direction, and I think ME3 will polish it

That said, I'm immensely excited for ME3's Weapon Mod system

I understand where you're coming from Jav but personally I prefered ME:1's style.  Yes, it was flawed, I'm not going to say it wasn't, but it would take surprisingly few changes to make it better really.  Instead of having I-X they could have skipped a few, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, you'd notice the changes more.  Same with the mods, and why in gods name did they not make them stack?  Bioware have been making RPG's for well over a decade, I should know I've been buying their games for about 12 years now so they know how to do that, just look at potions and arrows in BG2 for example.  I'll never understand how that seemed like a good idea.  If items stacked there'd be much less to scroll through and you could remove the 150 item limit and omnigel when you wanted rather than when you hit this imaginary limit.

Hopefully with the weapon Mods making a return, (even if in a new form) then we'll get back some measure of customization. *Prays fervently for the old style heat sinks mod option*

GUI Problems with Inventory from ME1 aside, my main problem with The weapon system in ME1 was that aside from the actual weapon manufacturers, I didn't have a single connection to any weapon in the game, at all. I then played DAO, and found my connection to weapons to be mostly reliant on physical appearance. Then I played The Witcher (for the first time 3 days ago) and really found that I preferred the weapons in The Witcher to that of DAO. Then thinking back to ME2, I remember when ME2 first released, there were love threads of all things, devoted to one weapon or another.

Widow, Revenant, Avenger, Phalanx, Mattock, Carnifex, these names all mean something to me now, and they're as dear to me as any of the characters in the game.

In ME1, the only weapons I had any actual attachment to, were the Spectre X weapons, mainly because they functioned like how I felt weapons that far into the future should function.

Every time I play ME1, after I get out of the Citadel, I beat Pinnacle Station, and in Shep's apartment, save and reload until I get a Spectre X weapon from the Random weapon order terminal so I don't have to keep checking my inventory after every encounter.

I like loot, but make it interesting and not just waiting to see if there are any yellow bars or not on the Stats List

Technically, it can't be said all assault rifles were the same because there was the Pulse Rifle.

[DieBySword]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

DieBySword wrote...


In ME1 we have 4 clases AR have 3 distinct different model design, the shotguns have 3 distinct design, snipers and pistols have 2 diferent designs that gives us 10 guns and ME2 gives us what 11, 15 if you count heavy weapons and 26 with dlc.

Uh, no. Tony's assessment is more accurate. I can tell my models well.

http://masseffect.wi.../Assault_Rifles
http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/Pistols
http://masseffect.wi...m/wiki/Shotguns
http://masseffect.wi...i/Sniper_Rifles

go see it for yourself if you cant believe it

[Nohvarr]

Uh huh, and how differenty did those weapons act when fired? My point continues to be that if I gave you a single Avenger at the beginning of the game, and the only way to improve it was via 'Upgrades' that gave a level boost to it's stats, it wouldn't have been very different from the system they used in ME 1. I can put on a bunch of different colors, I can small changes to heat or accuracy stat but at the end of the day, they all acted the same.

ME 2's guns acted differently as has been pointed out again, and again. Each one different from another. Each one requiring a significant adjustment to how they were used. Not just 'taping the trigger'.

I see the attempt to split hairs, to try and make small variation in stats enough to claim it was a totally different gun. It wasn;t not once you fired it.

[kregano]

DieBySword wrote...

Tony Gunslinger wrote...

It's easier to design a gun and alter it with +10 accuracy and -7 damage than designing two different guns with completely different recoil, ammo count, shield/barrier and armor bonuses, and rate of fire while still making both of them competitive. There was no comparison graph in ME2 because it's hard to chart burst-firing vs. continuous-firing vs. shield vs. armor vs distance modifers vs. recoil vs. ammo capacity all at once. And to say that ME2 guns were simplified, more work was done on them than ME1:

Noone saying they were symplified, they work differently from ME1 guns but in total nothing actualy changed except in ME2 they are limited to working in a static way when in ME1 we could change how some weapon worked depending on mods. You can get 2 shots with the sniper rifle in ME1 or you can mod it with an explosion and incinerate mod so its one shot kills anything but overheats from 1 shot or add the cooling mods for extended use.

The cooling mods on the sniper rifles were pretty pointless, even with the Spectre X sniper. You were better off slapping double Scram Rails X and Explosvie Rounds X and using the sniper rifle as an anti-everything cannon, which is what I did for every single build in ME1.

The biggest problem with the ME1 mods was the fact that they were totally invisible except for ammo mods. You couldn't tell if you'd slapped in Frictionless Materials __ and a Recoil ___ mod on your AR/pistol/shotgun/sniper unless you deliberately swapped out for another gun of the same model without mods then immediately swapped back. Any change in how the weapon worked was so minor it might as well have not existed to the player.