29 réponses à ce sujet

[MrGone]

Nah, nah nah.

You're math is wrong.

ME3/ME2 - ME1 * MW2 +/- GOW (DA2 - AP - ESS) = ME3.

Then you divide all that by zer-

[ironman001]

I want a character screen and inventory to see what will it look they can even call it pre alpha:)

[AngryFrozenWater]

Bozorgmehr wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I agree with fchopin. In addition to that, XP per enemy makes me want to fight those enemies. It's more of a challenge to get a higher level. There is another flaw related to ME2 and XP: The level cap was set too low. Long before I reached the final mission my level was maxed. I want to be able to grow and feel that I get better and I didn't get that feeling in the end stages.

But how is that different from ME1, for example? You get the same amount of XP per mission - the only thing that mattered was whether you killed enemies on foot or in the Mako. All those XP 'calls' for killing enemies only distract from the stuff that really matters - fighting.

In ME1 you had to complete 3 playthroughs to get to level 60; I prefer ME2's system where you can reach the level cap with a single playthrough. I do agree with ME2's lack of progress, some classes - like the Soldier - are 'done' once you've maxed their unique skill. Everything else didn't add much in terms of gameplay. I do hope leveling will feel better in ME3. I only had the feeling my Adept and Engineer were getting stronger over time.

Shoud it be different from ME1? The thing I didn't like was the progressive XP scale. Other than that I was happy with it. The way I suggested it, is the way I like it to be. I'm fine with the fact that you prefer something different.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 07 juin 2011 - 12:31 .

[Chris Priestly]

LOCKDOWN!



[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]