283 réponses à ce sujet

[MigoTheGIgo]

Im just worried for myself. How am i going to pass time for the better part of a year, especially given what we saw at E3.

Bioware, as always, have my full confidence, They haven't failed it yet, and i im certain they won't with ME3.

[sympathy4saren]

What about an ability to customize everything you want, buy anything you want, and drop or sell anything I don't want?

Of course, that comes with full modification of weapons, armor and squad armor.

The inventory layout/interface in Mass Effect was inefficient, but it was a far cry from unusable. That layout could have gotten a major overall and made more efficient instead of simply taken out of the game.

They cleaned the interface up, apparently, for Mass Effect 3. So what was the big deal? A lot of people thought combat was sloppy in ME...does that mean all shooting has to go and they should go fully to a turned-based VATS like system? No. You make improvements.

Now, I believe there can be a legitimate debate over inventory and whether it should be Normandy or on person. I've heard arguments of why they should be on the Normandy, and some people make valid points for that.

I disagree that just because you obtain the best of something doesn't mean you don't want to have other items of lesser statistical value. You may choose, for example, to not wear Spectre armor because you do not like the appearance. You may be able to modify and enhance other armor through augmentation or what have you to be comparable in power.

If you automatically get the best, whats the point? There is none. You have no option. But you always want better loot. So I feel that for rpgs the best way to do this is

A. Award the highest set of armor or most powerful weapon toward the end of the game, or even after game completion in some cases

B. Give as many independent pieces of weapons/armor/loot throughout the game in a wide of variety as possible to create opportunities for many variations of each item and flexibility for different circumstances

C. Hide high end items and make the player search for it....in a way that ties in the story...I.e. side quest...that fosters exploration, a perception that at any time you can come across something extremely valuable, and as a reward for taking extra effort.

If you heard on a side mission of a secret Prothean artifact that gave you a shield bonus of 15% on top of all your armor and upgrades, and it was hidden deep in the tunnels within Olympus Mons on Mars...how many would be pumped and seek it out?

Modifié par sympathy4saren, 14 juin 2011 - 01:03 .

[Someone With Mass]

MigoTheGIgo wrote...

Im just worried for myself. How am i going to pass time for the better part of a year, especially given what we saw at E3.

Bioware, as always, have my full confidence, They haven't failed it yet, and i im certain they won't with ME3.

Well, they're going to be at more events in July and August, so I'm sure everyone will be satisfied.

[Sarevok Synder]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Neither of those has any bearing on the weapons mods. Reloading when all that's required is an inventory is below average. If you can't see why, well I can't help you.

And it's so hard to tell if you want or don't want, for example, a scope on your gun or more stability or damage that you have to constantly re-visit the bench, because...?

Stop making excuses, it would be better to be able to change them on the fly and you know it. It would also allow for ammo types to be what they should be; items. Not powers.

[shinobi602]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

I never said two was a concrete number. But that's the latest information available.

I don't know where two is the latest information, but I trust what Casey has to say. I don't think he's making it up. It makes sense. He said "scopes, barrels, grips, camo/color" and "other materials".

Just in this picture you can see the different attributes you can mod:

Stability- aka modify the grip
Magazine- modify the ammo count
Fire rate- some other type of mod
Damage- most likely the barrel too
Accuracy- modify the scope

Modifié par shinobi602, 14 juin 2011 - 01:03 .

[Sarevok Synder]

shinobi602 wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

I never said two was a concrete number. But that's the latest information available.

I don't know where two is the latest information, but I trust what Casey has to say. I don't think he's making it up. It makes sense. He said "scopes, barrels, grips, camo/color" and "other materials".

Just in this picture you can see the different attributes you can mod:

Stability- aka modify the grip
Magazine- modify the ammo count
Fire rate- some other type of mod
Damage- most likely the barrel too
Accuracy- modify the scope

The mod slots are the two boxes on the right-hand side. It does however give me hope that there will be a lot more weapons to choose from this time.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 14 juin 2011 - 01:07 .

[shinobi602]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

The mod slots are the two boxes on the right-hand side.

Oh that's what you mean. We'll wait and see I guess. Hopefully you can modify everything instead of just two.

[Cainne Chapel]

But how do you know thats ALL the mod slots or just the mod slots for that particular mod? Thats where you're making the assumptions.

We dont know if there's a different mod box on the side for each stat, or each location or each TYPE of mod, or what.

We're all just stumbling in the dark with incomplete info, so how can you jump to conclusions if you dont have the whole set up?

I'm going to take a developers word before i believe a static picture which doesnt give us the whole story.

[Sarevok Synder]

shinobi602 wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

The mod slots are the two boxes on the right-hand side.

Oh that's what you mean. We'll wait and see I guess. Hopefully you can modify everything instead of just two.

I'm with you on that man. With those stats however, it could mean there will be a lot more weapons to choose from in each category this time. So maybe we will have a currency system. Time will tell.

[Sarevok Synder]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

But how do you know thats ALL the mod slots or just the mod slots for that particular mod? Thats where you're making the assumptions.

We dont know if there's a different mod box on the side for each stat, or each location or each TYPE of mod, or what.

We're all just stumbling in the dark with incomplete info, so how can you jump to conclusions if you dont have the whole set up?

I'm going to take a developers word before i believe a static picture which doesnt give us the whole story.

Agreed, but for the moment; it looks like two.

[Cainne Chapel]

I understand where you're coming from Synder, I do, i'm just saying its hard to tell with that picture, it only shows two slots yes, but those slots read Long barrel and "None". So how do we know WHAT that entails ya know?

We dont know specifics, we dont know the system, heck I dont even see a camo option in that picture which the devs said would be available, bottom line is we dont know anything abou the mod system so to judge it as a whole from an incomplete picture is an exercise in futility

[MigoTheGIgo]

Someone With Mass wrote...
Well, they're going to be at more events in July and August, so I'm sure everyone will be satisfied.

That is just going to make it worse! When? Where?

Why havent we invented Hibernation yet. I could sleep between all the good games, wake up and play for weeks, and then go back to sleep.

It would be beautiful...

EDIT: reading this, I dont feel like an addict. At all

Modifié par MigoTheGIgo, 14 juin 2011 - 01:15 .

[Someone With Mass]

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Stop making excuses, it would be better to be able to change them on the fly and you know it. It would also allow for ammo types to be what they should be; items. Not powers.

That's not an excuse. That's a legit question.

And why should ammo types be items? Just to be added to the modding system? Well, that's pointless, because I can change the ammo type to have different effects when it evolves instead of having five different mods that are basically the same thing.

[Sarevok Synder]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

I understand where you're coming from Synder, I do, i'm just saying its hard to tell with that picture, it only shows two slots yes, but those slots read Long barrel and "None". So how do we know WHAT that entails ya know?

We dont know specifics, we dont know the system, heck I dont even see a camo option in that picture which the devs said would be available, bottom line is we dont know anything abou the mod system so to judge it as a whole from an incomplete picture is an exercise in futility

It's not the mod system that bothers me. I would just love a basic inventory for modding on the fly and a currency system. But it looks like there isn't going to be one. But yeah, this is all just speculation.

[Sarevok Synder]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Stop making excuses, it would be better to be able to change them on the fly and you know it. It would also allow for ammo types to be what they should be; items. Not powers.

That's not an excuse. That's a legit question.

And why should ammo types be items? Just to be added to the modding system? Well, that's pointless, because I can change the ammo type to have different effects when it evolves instead of having five different mods that are basically the same thing.

Because ammo types are just that; items. Ammo is not something you conjure with your mind; it's a physical object, an item. It's not a legit question; different situations will require different mods. If they don't then we don't need mods to begin with. And changing on the fly is better than reloading, simple as that.

[Admoniter]

Because IMO the quality of Biowares most recent works are just not up to par with their other offerings. Furthermore I'm not a fan of massive philosophy shifts in game design between sequels especially ones that are supposed to be quite interwoven. I want sequels to still adhere to the core of the original; the only exception to this being if the core gameplay was completely un-salvageable. I also greatly disliked the sensationalism, excessive fan service and style over substance approach as well as the leaving one half of a hybrid game to stagnate and rot; that was present in ME2.

So in short I'm being skeptical because and negative because quite frankly I do not trust BW at this point, I do not like their new attitude towards game nor am I a fan of their design philosophy. If they can prove to me that they are capable of producing things that measure up to their other titles; I will fully support them. But until then they are on notice.

[Graunt]

Admoniter wrote...

Because IMO the quality of Biowares most recent works are just not up to par with their other offerings. Furthermore I'm not a fan of massive philosophy shifts in game design between sequels especially ones that are supposed to be quite interwoven. I want sequels to still adhere to the core of the original; the only exception to this being if the core gameplay was completely un-salvageable. I also greatly disliked the sensationalism, excessive fan service and style over substance approach as well as the leaving one half of a hybrid game to stagnate and rot; that was present in ME2.

A lot of people seriously get hung up on the smallest things that either did not really add much at all to the game, or they were implemented in a such a way that the game still played essentially the same.  ME2 removed a lot of "clutter"--you seem to mistake a really messy inventory system as well as excessive stat allocation that was condensed as being RPG elements that were left out.  ME2 was the superior game in pretty much every possible way other than biotics.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for long inventory lists and min/max number crunching in games where it actually adds something, but it didn't to this series.  Most of the "RPG" elements come from the immersion of the universe, your conversations and pretty much the class you pick at the character creation screen.  It's never been deep on the RPG elements at all and has always been more of a TPS with a lot of epic movie like interaction.

Modifié par Graunt, 14 juin 2011 - 02:34 .

[Cainne Chapel]

Well given the sci-fi warefare type setting, I'm not sure inventories are really ALL that needed. Especially if there isn't an especially high amount of consumable or needed on the fly items.

ME1 or 2 never really had any consumable items save for medi and omnigel, so there really isnt a need for much of an inventory if there isnt items like that ingame, also the need of a currency or "economy" is also relatively moot in these games as really just building up money is a time sink more than anything (Personally in game economies only seem to matter in world simulators, sandboxes or MMOs if you ask me, i HATE items that are just there to be clutter to be sold).

But in so far as much as we've seen it looks like the customization elements are being pushed better so thats good and while a proper inventory may not return (aside from weapons and armor lockers etc, which in this world i think work) I see that as a good thing and not necessarily a bad one.

As for the RPG, arguments, those have been done to death and there are MANY MANY examples of RPGs that go against the grain and some that dont, those arguments that inventories make an RPG or character customization makes an RPG, etc etc are really Moot because for the most part they dont really matter to the overall of the game most of the time. (since most RPGs you cant really customize the character TOO much or the inventories are TOO barren and so on and so forth).

But yes The Mass Effect series has never been a hardline RPG game, its always been a hybrid and even then its always been revolved around combat in regards to skills, items, etc.

Modifié par Cainne Chapel, 14 juin 2011 - 03:09 .

[Icinix]

Im less worried about ME3 than I am the direction of the marketing of games these days.

There are plenty of good games that come out, but are marketed to appeal to a particular audience that the game itself should never have been marketed at before. This has a two pronged affect, the people who probably won't like it, play it, give it bad reviews. The people who might like it, don't get it, and never get a chance to see it.

Not one game in particular stands out, but the general direction of marketing as a whole.

Oh..and ME3 is going to be fracking amazing. I **** you not.

[Cainne Chapel]

Well Marketing is a whole 'nother beast these days....

Suffice it to say most people who fall for it are idiots.

Not saying I've EVER fallen for marketing....but sometimes they do talk ya in to things....(Stares at Ab Roller in the corner)....dammit

[Admoniter]

Graunt wrote...
A lot of people seriously get hung up on the smallest things that either did not really add much at all to the game, or they were implemented in a such a way that the game still played essentially the same.

Debatable... I for one enjoyed how certain skills had non combat related benefits (no matter how small they were,) squad armor, l/m/h armor, omni tools and amps as equipment, not being forced down one morality path or the other, being able to use ammo mods no matter my class. And the game really doesn't play the same, there is a tangible difference between ME1 and ME2 (I'm talking about more than gameplay.)

 

ME2 removed a lot of "clutter"--you seem to mistake a really messy inventory system as well as excessive stat allocation that was condensed as being RPG elements that were left out.  ME2 was the superior game in pretty much every possible way other than biotics.

Ever hear of throwing out the baby with the bath water; I think that applies here. I'm not saying that ME1 had a good inventory or character screen; they didn't, the former was horrendous and the latter was well as you said excessive. I don't see ME2s as being much better though. Instead of being stuck with a system that involves minimal increases per each level; we get a system that forces you to build a mathamatically perfect character or you end up with excess skill points. As for the inventory it was bad yes; but now we get loadouts, we don't even get stats for our weapons; not that it matters seeing as how we have global stackable upgrades. As weel as the aformentioned loss of omni tools and bio amps as equipment; boy we really traded up huh?

My problem is that instead of fixing the issues; BW simply tossed it all out and replaced with the simplist most mind numbing system I can imagine. Instead of giving us a proper inventory, which lets face it isn't the impossible taks most people seem to think it is. Hell BW has made plenty of inventories in their other games why one of these wasn't in ME1 to begin with is truly a riddle for the ages. My point being that a couple of cogs in this clock are not working but instead of fixing them or getting someone who can I go buy a sundial instead.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for long inventory lists and min/max number crunching in games where it actually adds something, but it didn't to this series.  Most of the "RPG" elements come from the immersion of the universe, your conversations and pretty much the class you pick at the character creation screen.  It's never been deep on the RPG elements at all and has always been more of a TPS with a lot of epic movie like interaction.

The TPS is important I'm not arguing that but when you go about working on only the TPS while the only attention the RPG elements get is removal; there is a problem. Especially in a hybrid game where both facets of gameplay should recive equal attention.

Also nothing you said adresses the whole sensationalism, fanservice and style over substance aproach that practically oozes from the game.

Modifié par Admoniter, 14 juin 2011 - 03:43 .

[Slayer299]

@someone with mass - please explain how ammo types make more sense as ammo powers. It's just a matter of changing the ammo in your weapon, not a super power or something that you should need to spend 10+ points on for more than 1 person to use. The only exception to that would be Warp Ammo and that's pretty clear why.

[Gatt9]

Graunt wrote...

Admoniter wrote...

Because IMO the quality of Biowares most recent works are just not up to par with their other offerings. Furthermore I'm not a fan of massive philosophy shifts in game design between sequels especially ones that are supposed to be quite interwoven. I want sequels to still adhere to the core of the original; the only exception to this being if the core gameplay was completely un-salvageable. I also greatly disliked the sensationalism, excessive fan service and style over substance approach as well as the leaving one half of a hybrid game to stagnate and rot; that was present in ME2.

A lot of people seriously get hung up on the smallest things that either did not really add much at all to the game, or they were implemented in a such a way that the game still played essentially the same.  ME2 removed a lot of "clutter"--you seem to mistake a really messy inventory system as well as excessive stat allocation that was condensed as being RPG elements that were left out.  ME2 was the superior game in pretty much every possible way other than biotics.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for long inventory lists and min/max number crunching in games where it actually adds something, but it didn't to this series.  Most of the "RPG" elements come from the immersion of the universe, your conversations and pretty much the class you pick at the character creation screen.  It's never been deep on the RPG elements at all and has always been more of a TPS with a lot of epic movie like interaction.

I'm in agreement with Admonitor.

As far as the immersion of the universe,  there really isn't any.  You're not "Immersed" in the universe,  it's just a marketing buzzword.

The conversation's are largely irrelevant,  everyone's railroaded into the same result.  I played a 100% paragon,  my friend a 100% renegade.  We got the same quests,  the same rewards,  had the same party members,  they all liked us the same,  I destroyed the station and he saved it,  and we got the same basic ending.  In fact,  it was so irrelevant,  we both start with Cerberus trying to kill us in ME3.

There's no difference at all,  the choices and conversations never result in anything different,  no divergence.

In an RPG,  it would've lead down different paths with different results,  and in a halfway decent RPG,  would've resulted in a different party composition.  ME2's a straight TPS with long player controlled cutscenes that don't change anything,  like any other TPS.

[Noob451]

Dannyboy9876 wrote...

Look, people on these forums whine about everything.

I wouldn't take.anything.they say seriously without a strong argumment or a good point.

this....  (no offense to anybody, I love you all, but yeah... this hits the nail on the head)

[Massadonious1]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Massadonious1 wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...
If they go full shooter, it's game over. They will be trounced. Take a look at BF3, superior game play and vastly superior graphics. Biowares strength is in RPGs, if they move away from it they will crash and burn.

Yes, take a look at BF3, a FPS. The proper game you're looking to compare it to is Gears 3.

And the reasons those games ultimately do better is because they have multiplayer, not because they're technological marvels. Once people beat the 10 hour campaigns, they spend the rest of the life cycle of the game until the next installment is released, fragging others online. 

If Mass 3 is recieved well, any future iteriations of the franchise/universe that feature some kind of co-op or competitive multiplayer WILL start to sell at the Gears/CoD level.

I wouldn't touch GOW with a barge pole. It's a corridor shooter, exactly what the ME series is in danger of becoming. So no, I'm not looking to compare it to Gears 3.

I could care less whether you like the game or not, I'm just suggesting that you properly identify what kind of shooter it would be.

Hint: It's not an FPS.