791 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave666]

dreman9999 wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

0) It's not that it's a problem in modern day shooters, because we all know modern day shooters operate just like modern weapons. We know todays weapons shoots bullets that you can only fire from "ammo".

1) But in ME1, they got rid of then need for bullets/ammo - so when they said, here you go, you now need bullets to fire your weapons - then that was the problem.

2) Yes, ME1 system was broken were they allowed you to create the no heat generation weapon (which was stupid as you are doing minimal damage to be able to do so... you must like playing ME2 with ONLY the starting weapons too)

3) THE FIX would have to tie together upgrades and cooling, so that non would over take the other, each "cooling" upgrade thus increase the damage equally so that heat/cooling is a constant value the entire game.
3a) [MY 'idea'], 99% heat to 0% heat = 2.5 seconds wait. "Over heat" is 4 seconds wait to 0% OR you may use a limited cooling sink that completes to 0% cooling in 1 second on activation.


(of course.. I would like to know if they ever thought of this method, implemented a test build and tested it as such.)

If you want a plot reson for the change, think of it this way. ME2 weopons have more damage than ME1, this means that the concosion force.....Meaning more heat is generated when firing ME2 weopons. With the weopon they had a limit on this because the gun would be useless if it's too hot to fire bullets due to not being able to ejecting the heat sink.....
The only thing that dosen't make sense is the whole power cell being used for regular gun ammo.

Erm...yeah...your plot reason?  Its complete BS.  ME:1's weapons were waaay more powerful than ME:2's weapons.  In ME:1 enemies had far more health and shields than in ME:2 and guns still mowed them down extremely fast.  If you tried using ME:2's weapons in ME:1 you'd run out of ammo very quickly.

[Severyx]

While I was hoping for a hybrid system (focused more on thermal clips WITH some amount of cooldown, or 'ammo regen' as people call it), I can still see why they stuck with this. It worked for ME2 and was a huge improvement over ME1's system. As another user has pointed out, you can still get by without using the gun at all. To each their own, I guess.

I don't really think this is horrible news in any way. My hopes for a hybrid system were just that - hopes. Such wishes were a minority anyways.

[marshalleck]

They should just start calling it ammo, post a picture of Liara with shades on saying "deal with it" and then be done with this whole stupid ammo/thermal clip drama.

Modifié par marshalleck, 21 mai 2011 - 02:38 .

[RainyDayLover]

Wait, are you guys really surprised? I had always assumed ME3 was going to stick with the thermal clips and that it wasn't going back to ME1's broken shooting mechanics.

[Severyx]

The only reason drama being caused is because there are still people making arguments against it while not fully understanding it. The other end of the spectrum applies as well, and they take 'general combat improvement and development' out of the picture, saying that "X in ME2 doesn't make sense in the case of Y Because ME1 did X with Y a different way!" Reading too far into the differences to realized that BioWare changed it for a reason. They get super sad that it doesn't make sense in their heads.

Modifié par Severyx, 21 mai 2011 - 02:44 .

[Clonedzero]

im happy about this.
having to prioritize when to use different weapons is great. it also encourages people to use more weapons instead of sticking to just one. it also helps balance weapons by limiting the ammo supply on more powerful weapons.

tactical and intelligent use of resources. its great.

[CaptainZaysh]

 It's ammo.

[lazuli]

Banzboy wrote...

Sometimes i want to use my shotgun but i have no idea when i'll get ammo for it. It seems completely random.

Every time you pick up a thermal clip you get ammo for all of your standard weapons.  Every time you find heavy weapon ammo, you get ammo for all of your weapons.

[meteor0L]

Phaedon wrote...


Saying that the ME2 system is terrible is a bit silly if you ask me. 95% of all shooters use that system, so I suppose that you find them all terrible. Sorry, I can't help but frown at such extreme arguments.

95% of all SHOOTERS use it.

me1 was no shooter, it was a rpg.
it didn't even had hitboxes, a shot to the head did the same dmg as a shot to the leg.
the damages was based only on weapons and skills.

me2 on the other hand got rid of most of the rpg elements and turned into gears of war style shooter with a some little party and skill system elements.

i believe many of the people who dont like the me2 system an call it silly want to play a rpg , not a shooter. therefore they don't have to dislike all the other shooters because they don't even want mass effect to be a shooter. (just a  rough guess)

I'm fine with both systems, and if the rest of the game is good, i won't complain about the ammosystem for sure.

[sonsonthebia07]

I didn't like the way it was set up with infinite ammo in ME1 so I'm glad they are sticking with the thermal clips. I've read some interesting hybrid ideas though which could have been interesting. I never run out of ammo really in ME2 other than perhaps the sniper rifle when I use it excessively, and I prefer being able to run out then just running through the entire game sniping everything and never having to worry about my ammo capacity,

I also was not aware that the line between an RPG and a shooter was so thin that being able to take cover effectively in battle and having teammates that don't fire their never-ending supply of ammo at the wall in front of them because they cannot notice that it is in the way of their intended target was the turning point in gameplay. Apparently, running around in circles out of cover with barrier and immunity up at all times while enemies are repeatedly shooting me in the face is more of what an RPG represents.

I give you the lack of inventory and a smaller skill selection as well - I won't use the term that is overused on these boards. ME1 was more of an RPG in that regard than ME2 because it had more options, and also if that is a defining point in what makes a game an RPG to oneself. I would have loved to deck out my squad in combat armor, but ME1 had so many excessive crap in the inventory that it was just a hassle after awhile. But from what little I've been hearing of ME3, they plan on bringing some of that back, so that is good news.

Modifié par sonsonthebia07, 21 mai 2011 - 03:02 .

[CroGamer002]

meteor0L wrote...

95% of all SHOOTERS use it.

me1 was no shooter, it was a rpg.

God I love this denial.

Mass Effect 1 IS shooter. Only not good one.

it didn't even had hitboxes, a shot to the head did the same dmg as a shot to the leg.

There are many shooters with that thing.
And all of them suck.

the damages was based only on weapons and skills.

Ever hird of critical hits?
Headshots are great for critical hits, which ME1 failed to do it.

me2 on the other hand got rid of most of the rpg elements and turned into gears of war style shooter with a some little party and skill system elements.

You obviously never played GoW.

i believe many of the people who dont like the me2 system an call it silly want to play a rpg , not a shooter. therefore they don't have to dislike all the other shooters because they don't even want mass effect to be a shooter. (just a  rough guess)

Well Mass Effect was always a hybrod of RPG and shooter.
They had to know that they''ll play a shooter as well.

I'm fine with both systems, and if the rest of the game is good, i won't complain about the ammosystem for sure.

OK.

[Clonedzero]

i have absolutely NO idea how people were having ammo issues in ME2.
the only possible class i could see having an issue is the infiltrator who is just sitting in the back sniping all day

[Vengeful Nature]

Mesina2 wrote...

meteor0L wrote...

95% of all SHOOTERS use it.

me1 was no shooter, it was a rpg.

God I love this denial.

Mass Effect 1 IS shooter. Only not good one.

it didn't even had hitboxes, a shot to the head did the same dmg as a shot to the leg.

There are many shooters with that thing.
And all of them suck.

the damages was based only on weapons and skills.

Ever hird of critical hits?
Headshots are great for critical hits, which ME1 failed to do it.

me2 on the other hand got rid of most of the rpg elements and turned into gears of war style shooter with a some little party and skill system elements.

You obviously never played GoW.

i believe many of the people who dont like the me2 system an call it silly want to play a rpg , not a shooter. therefore they don't have to dislike all the other shooters because they don't even want mass effect to be a shooter. (just a  rough guess)

Well Mass Effect was always a hybrod of RPG and shooter.
They had to know that they''ll play a shooter as well.

I'm fine with both systems, and if the rest of the game is good, i won't complain about the ammosystem for sure.

OK.

I'm with Mesina here. Mass Effect was always about shooter/RPG hybridising. ME tried to keep to many RPG features and it just didn't work, ME2 was better but got rid of too many RPG features. ME3 looks to balance it very nicely.

[kregano]

I'm totally not surprised by the lack of a hybrid system. Back on the old Bioware ME forums, Christina Norman said that the reason they didn't like the hybrid system was because the game play testers would just burn through their clips until they hit the final one, at which point they would just rely on the cooldown to keep fighting instead of moving around to get clips.

[meteor0L]

Mesina2 wrote...

meteor0L wrote...

95% of all SHOOTERS use it.

me1 was no shooter, it was a rpg.

God I love this denial.

Mass Effect 1 IS shooter. Only not good one.

it didn't even had hitboxes, a shot to the head did the same dmg as a shot to the leg.

There are many shooters with that thing.
And all of them suck.

the damages was based only on weapons and skills.

Ever hird of critical hits?
Headshots are great for critical hits, which ME1 failed to do it.

me2 on the other hand got rid of most of the rpg elements and turned into gears of war style shooter with a some little party and skill system elements.

You obviously never played GoW.

i believe many of the people who dont like the me2 system an call it silly want to play a rpg , not a shooter. therefore they don't have to dislike all the other shooters because they don't even want mass effect to be a shooter. (just a  rough guess)

Well Mass Effect was always a hybrod of RPG and shooter.
They had to know that they''ll play a shooter as well.

I'm fine with both systems, and if the rest of the game is good, i won't complain about the ammosystem for sure.

OK.

which shooter that was released in the last 5-7 years (and didnt cost 3$ on release) doesn't use hitboxes?

i played gow... when i mean gears of war style i mean : you enter a room , first thing you see is : waist high cover all over the place. (this was only referred to the fights beeing much more focused on taking cover behind waist high objects).

what i basically wanted to say was: if me1 was 50% shooter , 50% rpg it turned to 70/30 in me2. (i went over the top saying me1 was NO shooter, it was just less of a shooter). i believe ( I DO NOT KNOW) that many of the people who didnt like the change in the ammo system, dont like the fact that me2 turned more into a shooter.

Modifié par meteor0L, 21 mai 2011 - 03:21 .

[ShepardsAssassin]

 I don´t have a problen with thermal clips (It was just fine in Mass Effect 2, but maybe I play too much Battlefield).
And anyway ME3 is going to have all ME2 weapons, so how would work if these guns should have infinite ammo, but they were desinged for thermal clips? I don´t know. But no offense to anybody.

Modifié par ShepardsAssassin, 21 mai 2011 - 03:37 .

[Halo Quea]

Fine Christina, keep your DAMN thermal clips. Just give us back Exploding Rounds and we'll call it even.

[xIxDarkWolfxIx]

I don't mind Thermal Clips, I would prefer if it though if they showed a % rather than how many shots though. It would still operate in the way, but aesthetically different. So the "Ammo Count" would look like this instead. 87% / 4. The 87% how much the Thermal Clip has been used or un-used depending on how you want to see it. And the 4 indicates how many clips you have. Each shot takes away or adds to that %.

[95Headhunter]

Phaedon wrote...

How exactly is it broken?

95% of the shooters right there have it, and in my 4 playthroughs I have only been completely out of ammo twice.

Maybe broken wasn't the right word to use.

Basically, these thermal clips are said to be compatible with any weapon, yes? This is so that you only have one thing to pick up, and it will replenish all of your weapons.

Fair enough, everything makes sense so far.

But then, it becomes possible to run out of 'ammunition' for one weapon, when you still have thermal clips in reserve for another. This doesn't make sense. Hence my question, 'are they universal, or not?' Currently, they're neither one thing nor the other.

If the clips truly are universal, then why is there not a single ammunition 'pool' from which you draw from how you like? If I'm an infiltrator, why can I not simply neglect the SMG and use the clips solely on my rifle and pistol?

I get that it's to increase the likelihood of always having a weapon, as to implement a single pool each weapon would have to draw from it at different rates to maintain balance (otherwise you'd just storm through with the Widow, with the hundreds of rounds that would also be available to an SMG) and only using clips on the ammo hungry sniper rifle would mean you ran out of total ammo much faster than if you only used the pistol, but why can't I be the one to make that decision?

Why I can't decide to risk burning through my ammunition dangerously quickly by only using the sniper rifle, but in doing so have more ammunition for that rifle than if I was spreading it across three weapons?

The one thing I hated about playin an infiltrator in ME2 was having to fall back on the SMG every know and then. I have no problems actively choosing it when it comes to, say, fighting geth, but when you have to continually fall back on it because the low ammo Carnifex and Mantis combo has run out, despite the SMG still having a wealth of thermal clips, it gets irritating that I can't play while still feeling like an infiltrator.

This has become a longer post than I intended, I just wanted to say that the shooting gameplay is fine as it is, I'm just disappointed they aren't developing it at all.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

Whatever. Never had any problems with either systems.

[Xeranx]

Hopefully someone will come out with a coalesced.ini tweak so I can have my cooldown. Probably would have been better if thermal clips were introduced as back up in case your weapon overheated enough so that the thermal clip warped. Then, you pop that clip out and put a new one in. It's the idea that you only hope combat wouldn't become a drag-out fight so you don't run the risk of warping a thermal clip, but just in case you have a spare -- or two.

Honestly, there have been people who have come up with better ideas of how to blend the two on this board and the fact that they won't do it...I don't know what to say anymore.

[Cloaking_Thane]

So basically ME3 is a big beta test for biowares upcoming shot at a shooter

[Halo Quea]

Xeranx wrote...

Hopefully someone will come out with a coalesced.ini tweak so I can have my cooldown. Probably would have been better if thermal clips were introduced as back up in case your weapon overheated enough so that the thermal clip warped.

This is EXACTLY what I suggested a long time ago!!!!!  

Thermal Clips as a backup when you run out of ammo!  I don't understand, what was wrong with that suggestion? It would have been the best of both without having to completely rely on secondary weapons or picking up dropped clips on the battlefield.

Oh Frak!! Nobody is listening. 

[wepeel_]

Gameplay wise I didn't mind the system in ME1 and I don't mind the system in ME2. None of them are very complicated or hard to deal with, and work well throughout the game.

What bothers me is the retconning and going against their own mythology in ME2 just to establish a more traditional shooter system. Every time I read the codex entry about thermal clips mentioning how the geth discovered that they could fire faster when avoiding overheating through the use of replaceable thermal clips, it makes me sigh.

Obviously, guns in ME2 don't fire faster than in ME1. If anything, they're slower. And even if that were the case, how strategic is it to implement weapons that won't fire at all unless you have thermal clips in them; in a world where you have weapons that handle extremely well even without clips? A squad with the thermal clip guns would actually be at a long-term disadvantage if they faced off against a squad with the ME1 weapons.

The whole thing is silly, and that's my main gripe. You shouldn't upset your own established game mythology just to bring about a rather pointless change. If they'd managed to come up with a better reason, maybe I wouldn't have cared about it.

Modifié par wepeel_, 21 mai 2011 - 04:25 .