251 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Lumikki wrote...

How about assistant options in game settings to adjust with slider how much assitance you want game to do for your targeting. So every player can put it way they like and works best for them? Would not matter is it PC or console or how it's controlled.

People might not remember, but Daggerfall did that very thing.  There was a toggle that slowed down the combat for people who wanted a less actiony experience.

Forcing everyone to play exactly the same game is guaranteed to exclude more consumers than not doing that.

[TheCrakFox]

Narp.

Guns should shoot where you point them, I don't want to spend EXP on making the game less frustrating when I could be spending it on improving and modifying my powers.

[Bogsnot1]

daqs wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...

So without spending any time on the firing range, you expect yourself to be an expert marksman? Thats what those "hidden stats" represented, how much training you put into using those weapons. Its not stupid, its logical.

But Shepard has spent time on the firing range; she's a veteran of an elite segment of the Alliance military.

And thats what those stats represent, wether Shep spent that time working with AR, pistols, sniper rifles, or boomsticks. Or spent the time working biotic/tech skills instead of playing with penis enhancers guns.

Modifié par Bogsnot1, 10 juin 2011 - 03:33 .

[Bluko]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

So, Mass Effect had what I think was a terrific stat-driven aiming mechanic.

I dunno if "terrific" is the right word.

At best it was an okay supplement to personal skill, to new players not familiar with such things it's probably frustrating. While I enjoyed the multitude of the skill trees in ME1, I really had no clue to what to invest in my first time playing. For me it was like well how many skill points do I need in Pistols vs. First Aid if I don't want to get own'd? Although part of the problem is the almost the utter lack of a proper tutorial in ME1.

Anyways the skill trees in ME2 were fine. I mean even if ME2 hadn't been radically changed, I still wouldn't have been surprised to see the powers reintroduced via a simpler format. Sequels will  almost always either expand upon original skills or simplfy them in some way. If ME2 doesn't feel like an RPG it's because it does away with loot more then anything else, and even gets rid of being able to sell stuff. Finding that ultra rare magic Pistol +3 is what makes a game feel like an RPG to me. Many disagree.

I like being an RPG Hero. Is it wrong to look for credits in crates?
 

I dunno if being able to aim your gun while paused is exactly a great feature either. Not really sure why you need this in ME2 even given that most abilities "lock on". Pausing to adjust your aim is kind of weak sauce, and it was pretty bad in ME1 since you easily use it to no-scope enemies to death with Sniper Rifles.

[Sylvius the Mad]

daqs wrote...

But Shepard has spent time on the firing range; she's a veteran of an elite segment of the Alliance military.

And yet, if I'm a spaz she'll still miss all the time.  If I'm drunk she'll miss all the time.  If I take advantage of the ability to aim while paused, suddenly she improves.

That's crazy.

[Sylvius the Mad]

TheCrakFox wrote...

Narp.

Guns should shoot where you point them, I don't want to spend EXP on making the game less frustrating when I could be spending it on improving and modifying my powers.

By what reasoning is accuracy not a power?

[TheCrakFox]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

TheCrakFox wrote...

Narp.

Guns should shoot where you point them, I don't want to spend EXP on making the game less frustrating when I could be spending it on improving and modifying my powers.

By what reasoning is accuracy not a power?

By powers I meant tech and biotics. You don't get enough EXP to level everything up so you choose which powers you want to focus on, shaping the way your Shepard fights. Levelling up isn't about simple progression it's about customisation.

I want my Shepard to finish the game more badass than he started but that doesn't mean he has to start out as a useless schmuck who can't shoot straight. It's fine to have accuracy stats in a game like KotOR where the player doesn't actually do the aiming, but if the it's down to the player to aim it's just irritating.

[Sylvius the Mad]

TheCrakFox wrote...

By powers I meant tech and biotics. You don't get enough EXP to level everything up so you choose which powers you want to focus on, shaping the way your Shepard fights.

So if they made accuracy a power that would be okay?  How good a shot he is would shape how he fights.

Levelling up isn't about simple progression it's about customisation.

Okay, so let's make improvement in accuracy optional.  Problem solved.

It's fine to have accuracy stats in a game like KotOR where the player doesn't actually do the aiming, but if the it's down to the player to aim it's just irritating.

I would argue that there's no difference.  If the stats affect aiming, then the player isn't doing the aiming - the player's movement of the targetting reticle becomes not aiming, but target selection.

You're assuming that the player is aiming, and then pointing out how having the game aim for him doesn't make sense.  Of course that wouldn't make sense, but your premise wasn't correct.

[ramnozack]

Bogsnot1 wrote...

daqs wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...

So without spending any time on the firing range, you expect yourself to be an expert marksman? Thats what those "hidden stats" represented, how much training you put into using those weapons. Its not stupid, its logical.

But Shepard has spent time on the firing range; she's a veteran of an elite segment of the Alliance military.

And thats what those stats represent, wether Shep spent that time working with AR, pistols, sniper rifles, or boomsticks. Or spent the time working biotic/tech skills instead of playing with penis enhancers guns.

Even in the beginning of Mass Effect 1 Shepard is a part of the N7 the equivalent of special forces, It was dumb that i had to level up and teach him how to shoot a pistol straight all over again even after his "elite" training. It would be even more dumb if i had to teach Shep how to shoot all over again in ME 3 even though he has killed thousands of people and things with his guns

[theSteeeeels]

ramnozack wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...

daqs wrote...

Bogsnot1 wrote...

So without spending any time on the firing range, you expect yourself to be an expert marksman? Thats what those "hidden stats" represented, how much training you put into using those weapons. Its not stupid, its logical.

But Shepard has spent time on the firing range; she's a veteran of an elite segment of the Alliance military.

And thats what those stats represent, wether Shep spent that time working with AR, pistols, sniper rifles, or boomsticks. Or spent the time working biotic/tech skills instead of playing with penis enhancers guns.

Even in the beginning of Mass Effect 1 Shepard is a part of the N7 the equivalent of special forces, It was dumb that i had to level up and teach him how to shoot a pistol straight all over again even after his "elite" training. It would be even more dumb if i had to teach Shep how to shoot all over again in ME 3 even though he has killed thousands of people and things with his guns

our tech and biotics also start of zero. for me1 and 2

[Occulo]

I think BioWare's treating it like hacking. Shepard already learned how to aim and hack in ME1, so why would s/he have to learn again in ME3?

[Sekhem]

Neverwinter_Knight77 wrote...

One of RPGs' most annoying elements, aside from grinding, are stats (usually in the form of strength, dexterity, etc). Good riddance, I say.  .

So in other words ... you don't like RPGs. =P

[Lumikki]

Sekhem wrote...

Neverwinter_Knight77 wrote...

One of RPGs' most annoying elements, aside from grinding, are stats (usually in the form of strength, dexterity, etc). Good riddance, I say.  .

So in other words ... you don't like RPGs. =P

mm.. Not sure who's serious..

Stat isn't it self annoying, but most the time stats doesn't really work well in RPG's. Stats should provide balanced character customation, but stats seem to provide more inbalanced min max number gameplay. How many times you have character where only one or two stat adjusment is the only reasonable option? So, when the orginal idea is about been customation tool for character, stats has become statical gameplay it self. That's just wrong, when we should talk roleplaying in RPG's, not number based gameplay.

[CerebraLArsenaL]

 I think there should be an auto-aim, even though I hated it on sniper rifles (Im pointing at the guy with gun, NOT the ****g barrel damnit) for a different reason. I have Cerebral Palsy(long story short, motor centre of my brain doesnt work) While mild and I can go about daily life without incident -- usually -- it affects my reaction times, which means it is damn near physically impossible for me to hit a fast moving target by my own skill. I generally dont play shooter games because of this ( I suffer through CoD and Halo to play with friends. An example, my K/D in MW2 hovers around .2 -- yes thats a point)

So am I to be forced to stop playing games altogether because "We need more action! More CoD!"?

Edit: Make auto aim a menu OPTION for CoD'ers

Modifié par CerebraLArsenaL, 10 juin 2011 - 06:52 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Lumikki wrote...

Stat isn't it self annoying, but most the time stats doesn't really work well in RPG's. Stats should provide balanced character customation, but stats seem to provide more inbalanced min max number gameplay. How many times you have character where only one or two stat adjusment is the only reasonable option? So, when the orginal idea is about been customation tool for character, stats has become statical gameplay it self. That's just wrong, when we should talk roleplaying in RPG's, not number based gameplay.

I completely disagree.  The job of stats is to give the player control of his character's development, for good or ill.  If the player makes the character overpowered, so be it.  If the player gimps the character, so be it.

The desire for balance is what's removing the stats in the first place.

[Sylvius the Mad]

CerebraLArsenaL wrote...

I have Cerebral Palsy(long story short, motor centre of my brain doesnt work) While mild and I can go about daily life without incident -- usually -- it affects my reaction times, which means it is damn near physically impossible for me to hit a fast moving target by my own skill. I generally dont play shooter games because of this ( I suffer through CoD and Halo to play with friends. An example, my K/D in MW2 hovers around .2 -- yes thats a point)

So am I to be forced to stop playing games altogether because "We need more action! More CoD!"?

RPGs have traditionally been an intellectual exercise, not a physical exercise.  That is what I would like them to remain.

Aside: My mother has cerebral palsy.

[Waltzingbear]

The pen and paper RPGs used stats to represent the character's abilities because there was no way to simulate and represent actual skill- something that is completely different with modern video games, where the skill to aim and move and dodge represent the skill to aim and dodge.

Of course sometimes we want to play a character that is a master at its skill without mastering the skill ourselves, and that's one of the great things about RPGs; but, and not to be perceived as snide, I don't think that the ability to aim your gun while the tactical menu is open was an intentional game feature, and wouldn't it just be easier to play on lower difficulties, if you prefer not to become proficient in a shooter-like gameplay?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Waltzingbear wrote...

Of course sometimes we want to play a character that is a master at its skill without mastering the skill ourselves, and that's one of the great things about RPGs; but, and not to be perceived as snide, I don't think that the ability to aim your gun while the tactical menu is open was an intentional game feature, and wouldn't it just be easier to play on lower difficulties, if you prefer not to become proficient in a shooter-like gameplay?

It's not about proficiency.  It's about how shooter mechanics harm the coherence of the game world.

If Shepard is an elite soldier, then she should be a good shot.  That she's a bad shot (or an inconsistent shot) is the problem.  Making her lack of skill less likely to get her killed does nothing to fix it.

Also, having a fair and balanced ruleset creates opportunities for roleplaying in combat, as in-character decisions will produce sensible outcomes.  That fair ruleset tends to lie somewhere just above Normal on difficulty sliders.

Whether I'm proficient in shooter-like gameplay is irrelevant.  I don't want to engage in shooter-like gameplay, and in ME2 the only way around that is to aim while paused (again, ME offered many more options - it had stat-driven aiming, and there were more offensive biotic and tech abilities).

The pen and paper RPGs used stats to represent the character's abilities because there was no way to simulate and represent actual skill- something that is completely different with modern video games, where the skill to aim and move and dodge represent the skill to aim and dodge.

And that doesn't make any sense.  The stats represent the character's abilties.  Having player skill now determine
that instead is differrent in kind.  Requiring that a character can't braek down a door unless the player is strong enough would be insane, and yet these action mechanics require something relevantly similar.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 10 juin 2011 - 08:08 .

[Massadonious1]

Intellectual as in "deciding" between something that has +5 <attribute> or something that has +4 <attribute> or intellectual as in a cohesive and smart storyline? Because the latter isn't exclusive to RPG's, and I've always failed to see how pressing a button to shoot a machine gun is any more of a thinker's task than pressing the same button to cast magic missles.

[TheKillerAngel]

I want my bullets to land where I aim them, not where some RNG mechanic determines they should be.

[CerebraLArsenaL]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

RPGs have traditionally been an intellectual exercise, not a physical exercise.  That is what I would like them to remain.

Aside: My mother has cerebral palsy.

Which is why I play them, and why I like ME, and Bioware before EA sunk in....more about the story, less about the dollars. Im not saying they should remove skill based shooting all together. I think its  necessary in any game that requires shooting. But if they truly are trying to grab "a wider audience", I think they work on making the game accessible w/options like that. I dont want to be constantly reminded how much i suck at shooting, or how handcuffed my body is at times...CoD/Halo provide plenty of that.

As far as stat based shooting...Its important to note this is a hybrid, not a straight rpg. As such, they will give up elements each side to balance in the middle. I actually think shooting should be one of these. It just works for the type of game it is. Like it or not, combat is run and gun, not Encounter---Battle---back to world, like say FF. In that vein they should make the shooting accessible as well, like i said

Edit: Bear, dumbing down difficulty does not make it fun. as Tupac said in a song "I don't want it if it's that easy"

I think Sylvius and I are saying, make a system wherein the player can play at any level and not be required to be a shooter god

Modifié par CerebraLArsenaL, 10 juin 2011 - 08:28 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Massadonious1 wrote...

Intellectual as in "deciding" between something that has +5 <attribute> or something that has +4 <attribute> or intellectual as in a cohesive and smart storyline?

Both.

Though if the attribute choice is that simple, it's a pretty shallow mechanic.

Because the latter isn't exclusive to RPG's, and I've always failed to see how pressing a button to shoot a machine gun is any more of a thinker's task than pressing the same button to cast magic missles.

It's exactly the same, assuming the same mechanics.  If that magic missle misses because I was bad at aiming it, that's as much of a problem as a machine gun doing the same thing.

The thinker's task resides primarily is deciding who to shoot, and why, and when, and under what circumstances, and how, and with what, following what preparation.

[CerebraLArsenaL]

Exactly Sylvius. Im playing Resonance of Fate right now, (A traditional RPG, w/guns) I can choose to have more accuracy, but the guns might weigh too much too carry, or too weak...but thats a decision I have to make...however RoF is Encounter Turn Based....the stat driven mechanic just isnt plausible run and gun...It took til you got VII-VIII level weapons and mods in ME1 to hit like an elite soldier...til then your means of accuracy was powers(Marksman and such), which vibes with your thinking, but takes away from using strategy

[Waltzingbear]

And yet ME has taken its direction as a shooter and the challenge in the gamplay lies in the skill to perform fast paced actions with a more tactical approach, and honestly I'm glad it did.

Of course Shepard should be able to ace everything but if it was that trivial there would have been no challenge in the game and it would've been like watching a movie, or the gameplay would have had to be completely different.

I feel for you, I really do, but ME is not a traditional stat based RPG, just like you can't win Dragon Age Origins with dodging slashing and what not in an active manner based on your direct actions. You want the complexity but you want the game to play more slowly, ME is just not that kind of game.

It would be interesting to see an auto aim system implemented into the game, it is just a strange combination and something we aren't used to see. That's not the focus of the gameplay however and creating a 'classic RPG mode' would require a lot of work and possibly just create a lot of awkward aspects.

And that doesn't make any sense. The stats represent the character's abilties. Having player skill now determine that instead is differrent in kind. Requiring that a character can't braek down a door unless the player is strong enough would be insane, and yet these action mechanics require something relevantly similar.

Don't twist my words there. Strength is another thing than aiming with your mouse and moving with your keyboard, and it's a passive trait to the character that has no reason to be represented by the player's input.
Games are meant to be fun, and requiring you to actually run in order to sprint in-game is not under that category for most players; sitting in a comfty chair and straining your abilities in a pre-defined game-world and rules is to some.

The character and its attributes are already set- when you press a movement key the character will move at the same speed no matter how hard you press it. The difference is in how you play with what you have. It is all represented by a very simplistic interface.
You can say that it's exactly the same thing with classic RPGs only with stats, and while that is true, action games offer much more interactivity and game counterparts that respond directly to the player's action; that's why so many people love them.

Modifié par Waltzingbear, 10 juin 2011 - 08:57 .