I saw this and it made me sad.
http://imageshack.us...10608at214.jpg/I'm assuming that, if Fuel Depots are still in the game, that means that we're still piloting a mini Normandy around the Galaxy Map. I had really hoped BW would return to the destination reticle from ME1. I suppose that also means that every time I return to the Normandy, the ship is going to auto-undock just like in ME2... *sigh*
[quote]Tony Gunslinger wrote...
[quote]JKoopman wrote...
Oh, but I thought that ammo was so plentiful in ME2 that only an absolute moron ever ran out and no one who played sensibly ever had to worry about it? Isn't that the excuse that ME2 apologists (yourself included) use in every discussion about thermal clips? And I also thought that ME1 was "too hard" and "frustrating" when those nasty enemies hit you with Sabotage and left you helpless for those crucial 60 seconds? Again, another common complaint I hear from the ME2 crowd about how thermal clips are
such an improvement over heatsinks.
To borrow your own phrase, you seem to be "all over the place" in this regard, using whatever position best suits your argument at any given time.[/quote]
Nice try. Ammo is plentiful only if you engage the battle proactively instead of camping in one spot. I clearly remember when you were the one complaining that staying on spot and snipe everything as a valid tactic and shouldn't be punished.
And to top if off, you argue for regenerative ammo but are against regenerative health, yet you use the exact same reason why regenerative ammo destroys tactics and strategy. Do you even know why they put in health regen?[/quote]
I argue against thermal clips because they were a needless change that breaks lore, and the explanation that BW used to shoe-horn them into the game is about the most half-assed, nonsensical garbage I've ever heard. Not to mention that it's implementation is completely inconsistent. Cooldowns were also a unique feature that ME1 introduced that helped differentiate it from other shooters on the market, and it was removed explicitly to do the exact opposite; make ME2 more like traditional shooters with a familiar ammo mechanic.
Cooldown worked. It may have needed a little balancing and tweaking, but removing it entirely was throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
That it's somewhat annoying to play an Infiltrator (aka "sniper") and not be able to use the weapon that the class was built around for the majority of the game - instead relying on an SMG 90% of the time - is an argument that I've used in opposition to the thermal clip system, but it's an argument of playstyle and entertainment value, not difficulty. I've never "whined" that the game is too hard because I'm running out of ammo for my SR. I've complained that I'm not able to use the weapon that I want to use and instead find myself using an SMG for virtually every encounter. Yes, sniping IS a valid tactic and it should be made more feasible or else sniper rifles as a whole become pointless. The fact is, the thermal clip system is not set up well for sniping. You can use ARs, SMGs, Pistols and Shotguns without worrying much about ammo. Why should sniper rifles be the sole exception?
Nice try distorting my argument though.
You also didn't refute my point. In fact, you basically agreed with me that ammo is a non-issue.
[quote]Tony Gunslinger wrote...
Encourage risk/reward decisions. Aggressively taking over a key position is going to hurt you, and nobody is going to do that if health is finite. Instead of powers like 'heal' in RPGs where you can cast at any time, health regen is a fixed time, meaning you can't simply rush in, kill shoot a couple of guys and hit the 'heal' button and shoot some more. You have to know how much damage you're taking and take a risk because you can't insta-regen your health on a whim.[/quote]
Wrong. The Trauma Module upgrade in ME2 allows you to use Unity to restore health, meaning you CAN still "rush in, kill shoot a couple of guys and hit the 'heal' button and shoot some more."
More to the point, ME1 had finite health and finite medi-gel and no one seemed to have much trouble advancing through areas in that. But then, ME1 was so easy, right? Or was it too hard? I get so easily confused about which one it is at any given time.
[quote]Tony Gunslinger wrote...
[quote]JKoopman wrote...
[quote]Tony Gunslinger wrote...
That's the
skinner box approach to game design. It's probably the cheapest and oldest trick in the gaming industry. There's nothing deep about that at all, anyone (like you, for instance) can come up with such a system. All you're doing is set up the core gameplay, then granulize them into components and scatter them on all over the game for the player to grind and assemble themselves. It's there to artificially lengthen gameplay and make it seem complex when the core gameplay itself is actually pretty one-dimensional. If the gameplay can't sustain itself without inventory, then it's a shallow gameplay.[/quote]
And ME2's approach is inherently better because...?
Having a clever label for it does nothing to refute the argument.[/quote]
ME2's gameplay works even without inventory.
ME1 depended on you focusing leveling up and finding loot to distract you from the fact that its core gameplay is pretty ordinary.
Go through a level 60 NG+ game already with all the items you need, and see how tedious the combat can be. It's nothing but a power spam repetition. Go play ME2 NG+ and see how well it holds up without the upgrades.
There was no point in combat in ME1 NG+, the only real incentive to play NG+ was to max your charm/intimidate to unlock all dialog options and unlock bonus powers and weapons. ME2's NG+ allows you to try builds that otherwise would not have been possible.[/quote]
Nice contradiciton. "There was no point, except for these points here."
Yes, creating an overpowered uber-God and blitzing through the story IS about the only point to playing ME1 NG+. BioWare were never shy about saying as much. Of course, to get that uber-God with all the best equipment, you're looking at probably your 3rd run through and at that point I would argue that anyone who's willfully subjecting themselves to it forfeits all rights to complain about it being too easy and pointless, but that's beside the point.
Anywho, exactly what "new builds" does ME2's NG+ allow you to try out? I suppose you could use Retraining to respec and try out different outcomes but, again, at Lvl 30 you'll have enough points to max out every power you've got anyway and the only real variation available is "do I want a small AoE radius or do I want 20% more damage on the same powers I had before?" I don't exactly consider that to be a new "build" worthy of the name. I think you're grossly overstating ME2's complexity.
[quote]Tony Gunslinger wrote...
And asking questions in this condescending way makes you sound smart because...?
Ending a reply with snide comments like what I'm doing right now is cheap. Doesn't get you points.[/quote]
I asked a question. If you
read it in a condescending way, that's on you.
I find it especially ironic that I pointed out the fact that painting an argument with a snide label does nothing to refute it and your response was to post
another snide comment criticizing my intelect without actually responding to the question at hand (namely, how exactly is ME1's gameplay not able to "sustain itself" without inventory and precisely how is the inverse true for ME2?). You instead went off on some tangent about how the 3rd runthrough of ME1 with all the best weapons and equipment is pointless.
The only point of separation between ME1 and ME2 NG+ is, as you yourself apparently admit, that upgrades don't carry over in ME2 and that you have the option of respec'ing your abilities for whatever that's worth. It has nothing whatsoever to do with inventory, and I'd be interested to hear how you somehow connect them.
[quote]Tony Gunslinger wrote...
[quote]JKoopman wrote...
I'm assuming that by "endgame" you mean level 60 NewGame+? Most players finished their first runthrough around Lvl 45, and I can tell you that I only had a handful of maxed out talents at that point and had to be very selective about what I put points into. In light of that, I think saying that every class in ME1 had the same abilities endgame is more than a little disingenuous. How many variations of Lvl 30 Adepts are there really in ME2? Oh, that's right. One person can have a small AoE version of a power while another has more damage. It's like a totally different class![/quote]
Funny how you use Adepts as your only evidence to support your point. Care to elaborate on the other classes, please? Confirmation bias strikes again.[/quote]
Adepts. Engineers. Infiltrators. I can use whatever class you want. Care to explain why my selection of Adepts somehow makes any difference there? ALL powers in ME2 follow the same "AoE or more damage" evolutionary paths, whether it be Warp, Overload or Concussive Shot. Confirmation bias indeed. All we've confirmed is your own bias.
[quote]Tony Gunslinger wrote...
[quote]JKoopman wrote...
[quote]Tony Gunslinger wrote...
You're all over the place. In the previous paragraph you're saying the Locust is so much better than all the rest of the SMGs, and if it's true, then by your definition it's progression/evolution (look, a buzzword). No offense, but you and a couple of others I've read so far are the worst offenders of
Confirmation Bias.[/quote]
How does it show "progression" to receive the best weapon in the first 5% of the game and not equip anything else for the remaining 95%?
[/quote]
Last time I checked, you just don't 'receive' the Locust. You have to get past 2 YMIRs and a gunboat with enemies popping out at random places. Tell me, how was your 1st couple of playthroughs on that mission while so low-leveled that you barely have any powers? If you're going after it that early, it's because to you, it's worth the big spike in difficulty so that you'll have an easier time later. That's called dealing with 'progression'.[/quote]
No more difficult than any of the other recruitment/loyalty missions available to the player after Freedom's Progress...?
You face 2 YMIR mechs in both Jack's and Grunt's recruitment missions too (both available right after Freedom's Progress) as well as a Gunship and potentially another YMIR during Garrus' recruitment mission (also available right after Freedom's Progress). Why should Kasumi's mission be some insurmountable hurdle to you? Doing Kasumi's mission first is actually advisable if for no other reason than because the Locust makes every other recruitment mission a cake walk whereas my Sentinel and Infiltrator would be stuck trying to complete them with nothing but a Shuriken otherwise, and good luck dropping anything with that weak POS.
I fail to understand how it's "dealing with progression" by doing the mission that nets you the clearly superior weapon first, nor how that refutes the point I made earlier about ME2's "unique" weapons simply leading to equipment stagnation. Care to elaborate?
[quote]Tony Gunslinger wrote...
[quote]JKoopman wrote...
And please, don't go slinging words like bias around when you're guilty of plenty yourself.
[/quote]
The only difference between you and me is that I know I'm biased, and you don't.
[/quote]
So you can read my mind, eh? Interesting. Can you also predict lottery numbers?
Modifié par JKoopman, 16 juin 2011 - 07:04 .
Guest_KaidanWilliamsShepard_*
Retour en haut
