SalsaDMA wrote...
The OP started out by asking for stuff that existed in ME1, and later on another guy proclaims that the stuff he is asking never existed in the ME series. Go read the thread story if you don't believe me.
I assumed, since the first comment in the post was directed at me, the second was as well. It is not my position, and I won't defend what someone else posted.
SalsaDMA wrote...
Nope. Read the thread again. A couple of peeps posted that they expected to hit whatever they pointed their gun at. No mention of anything else besides this "fact". Which is, ofc, where they are horribly wrong as far as shooting an actual gun goes.
You're taking their comments out of the context of the wider discussion. I'm sure most people reading in these forums are aware that a gun must be aimed in order to hit the appropriate target, and that most people must learn how to aim properly. While many might not have the same accuracy in real life as they have in the game, it is not inappropriate to expect that if the player directs Shepard to aim at a given target, that is the place ( to within a certain degree, depending on the weapon) where the bullet will go. This is a standard in the shooter genre.
SalsaDMA wrote...
And no, Spec ops does not mean you are a marksman specialist in every weapon. It means you have a physique, tactical training, weapon training to a satisfactory degree and specialized training in specific fields to suit your role in missions. There is a difference between knowing how to aim and fire a random assault rifle you pick up, and the accuracy you get by tinkering with a weapon to suit just your specs and getting intimate with it while training with it at the cost of training in other fields, like say the fields an engineer or Adept would specialize in.
Heck, even 2 snipers are not the same proficiency regardless of spending the same amount of training. Take a look at skeet shooting in winter olympics. People doing hard physical exercise, then clamping down to fire off a couple of shots quickly before moving on. These people train quite alot all of them, and yet there are sometimes pretty big differences in their capabilities, despite them all basicly being marksman specialized.
In the US military, all are trained and must qualify with assault rifles as part of their basic training.
Sinosleep is a veteran of the US military and has attested to this on numerous occasions in these forums (he also served in the US campaign in Afghanistan). I also have several real life friends and relatives who can attest to this, including my father who is a retired naval veteran (after 40 years of service) and my grandfather (may he rest in peace) who was also a naval veteran and once shot a falcon with a 30/30 at over 100 yards using iron sights.
Even if this weren't true, Shepard is not just any special operative. He is a commanding officer in the Alliance fleet, and his prowess as an infantryman is great enough that his name was put forward by a Turian for candidacy in the Spectre program. He has great skill (no matter which origin you choose, Shepard's skill is why he survived), and thus should know more than just the rudimentary uses of his arsenal. Additionally, he is a veteran of multiple campaigns and combat scenarios. I think he knows how to wield an Assault Rifle, Shotgun, and/or other weapon (depending on the class) with great efficacy.
As a side note, an Infiltrator Shepard would not be known accross the galaxy among multiple species (or even likely qualified as a sniper) were he unable to hit the side of a barn with a sniper rifle (as is the case on Eden Prime in ME1). In this example, ME2 handles the reality of weapon training far better than ME1, though I admit that it is not entirely true to real life. After all,
it's a game.SalsaDMA wrote...
It's a matter of preference for which kind of game you want. Do you want a game where you play the role of commander Shepard, thus meaning that it's Shepards ability to shoot that should be the deciding factor in wether the shots hits; or do you want to play the role of you playing a shooting game where it's your ability to shoot stuff through the given interface given that is the deciding factor in wether shots connect with enemies.
Some prefer the ability to immersive themselves and play the role of Commander Shepard. Some prefer the ability to just play a videogame without needing to abstractilize too much mentally in order to 'get the point'.
Roleplaying isn't everyones cup of tea, which is why discussions like this thread occur. 
We are in agreement on your final statement. However, the OP wants Mass Effect to be as close to a straight up RPG as possible, even though that is not the intent of the developers. That's why this discussion is so tedious.
To give an example, I like caster classes, but I realize that an Adept is not a caster in the traditional sense, and I don't want it to be one. The OP likes RPGs, and wants Mass Effect to be (almost entirely, if not entirely) a traditional RPG, when it is designed to hybridize the Role Playing genre with that of the Third Person Shooter. The stated intent of the development team is to bring the combat in-line with other TPS games, while preserving the character development, interaction, and ability to affect outcomes that generally stand as hallmarks of Western RPGs.
EDIT: Again, I hope that the OP can continue to enjoy the Mass Effect franchise, and I am almost positive he will still be able to aim while paused in ME3. However, changing back to stat bases shooting would alienate a lot of the gamers that jumped into the franchise with ME2, and would be a step in the wrong direction. I would say with a 99% certainty that we will not see stat based aiming in ME3, except in the broadest sense (different weapons having different accuracies and weapon mods).
Modifié par kstarler, 12 juin 2011 - 01:21 .
Retour en haut
:lol:
