180 réponses à ce sujet

[AntiChri5]

Mass Effect had the worst shotgun (and yes, despite all of the different names there was really only the one) of any game i have ever played. The only advantage it had over other weapons was that it had a bit more force, so knocking enemies down was easier. In all other aspects, it was simply inferior to all of the other weapons. When somethings only claim to fame is that it is easier to perma stun enemies with, you know you need to redo it.

Mass Effect 2 changed shotguns to be highly effective in certain situations (they now had an effectibe niche, giving you a reason to use them) with enough variety to even step outside this one limitation. A massive improvement.

[LPPrince]

HTTP 404 wrote...

Stardusk78 wrote...

HTTP 404 wrote...

I think shotguns should be very different from each other. Very close up and high damage shotguns to high clip lower damage and further range shotguns. With speciality shotguns like the geth shotgun are pretty cool.

The GPS isn't really a shotgun.

then call it whatever you like.  I don't mind there being options and speciality weaponry useful for certain missions and still retain balancing compared to other weapons.  They should make that shotgun do even less damage to armor.

My point in my post was that I want the choices of shotguns to be very different from each other.... I don't want 5 shotguns that do the same thing.

This too. My favorite part of the GPS(besides its range) is that its completely different from other shotguns, but is still a shotgun.

There needs to be differences between them. Longer range shotguns(than the usual) like the Eviscerator and the GPS are welcome, in my mind.

[LPPrince]

AntiChri5 wrote...

Mass Effect had the worst shotgun (and yes, despite all of the different names there was really only the one) of any game i have ever played. The only advantage it had over other weapons was that it had a bit more force, so knocking enemies down was easier. In all other aspects, it was simply inferior to all of the other weapons. When somethings only claim to fame is that it is easier to perma stun enemies with, you know you need to redo it.

What are you on about? I know MANY people who loved ME's shotguns, including myself. It was my main weapon and I loved using it.

[AntiChri5]

Whether or not you liked it does not change that it was functionally inferior to the other weapons in the game.

[HTTP 404]

AntiChri5 wrote...

Whether or not you liked it does not change that it was functionally inferior to the other weapons in the game.

it did shoot rockets...thats pretty awesome.

[AntiChri5]

With a rather long cooldown.

[LPPrince]

How was it inferior to the pistols, assault rifles, and sniper rifles?

I know the pistols were the best weapons overall, but what about the other two?

[CroGamer002]

AntiChri5 wrote...

With a rather long cooldown.

And it's pretty buggy since it goes through Geth very often.

Modifié par Mesina2, 15 juin 2011 - 04:21 .

[Bozorgmehr]

LPPrince wrote...

This too. My favorite part of the GPS(besides its range) is that its completely different from other shotguns, but is still a shotgun.

There needs to be differences between them. Longer range shotguns(than the usual) like the Eviscerator and the GPS are welcome, in my mind.

The GPS isn't like the other ME2 shotguns in almost every way. And although rather different compared to the others, the GPS also ruined weapon balance (like the other dlc weapons did).

I believe it's irrelevant whether one likes weapons or not, the main aim ought to be about giving all weapons specific strengths and weaknesses, those dlc weapons didn't have any weakness whatsoever thus rendered the need to use or switch to other weapons redundant.

I prefer having to make choices; playing the original (non-dlc) version of ME2 presented a hard choice on the Collector ship. Casters had to chose which bonus weapon to take, which had a major impact on actual gameplay. Taking the shotgun requires close-range combat; the sniper rifle long-range; and the assault rifle in between but lacking at close- and long-range. This also meant you're likely going to need the other weapons to help out in situations in which the bonus weapon wasn't the most effective option.

A weapon like the GPS completely 'ruins' shotguns. It's an excellent allround weapon - great up to SR range and still devastingly effective at close range. Switching weapons becomes counter-productive and therefore reduces the fun in my book. I definitely hope there will be no 'super' weapons in ME3 like the GPS, Mattock, and to a lesser extent the Locust.

[Stardusk78]

Bozorgmehr wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

This too. My favorite part of the GPS(besides its range) is that its completely different from other shotguns, but is still a shotgun.

There needs to be differences between them. Longer range shotguns(than the usual) like the Eviscerator and the GPS are welcome, in my mind.

The GPS isn't like the other ME2 shotguns in almost every way. And although rather different compared to the others, the GPS also ruined weapon balance (like the other dlc weapons did).

I believe it's irrelevant whether one likes weapons or not, the main aim ought to be about giving all weapons specific strengths and weaknesses, those dlc weapons didn't have any weakness whatsoever thus rendered the need to use or switch to other weapons redundant.

I prefer having to make choices; playing the original (non-dlc) version of ME2 presented a hard choice on the Collector ship. Casters had to chose which bonus weapon to take, which had a major impact on actual gameplay. Taking the shotgun requires close-range combat; the sniper rifle long-range; and the assault rifle in between but lacking at close- and long-range. This also meant you're likely going to need the other weapons to help out in situations in which the bonus weapon wasn't the most effective option.

A weapon like the GPS completely 'ruins' shotguns. It's an excellent allround weapon - great up to SR range and still devastingly effective at close range. Switching weapons becomes counter-productive and therefore reduces the fun in my book. I definitely hope there will be no 'super' weapons in ME3 like the GPS, Mattock, and to a lesser extent the Locust.

Lord Bozorgmehr, jij hebt de absolute waarhed gesproken!

[HTTP 404]

Bozorgmehr wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

This too. My favorite part of the GPS(besides its range) is that its completely different from other shotguns, but is still a shotgun.

There needs to be differences between them. Longer range shotguns(than the usual) like the Eviscerator and the GPS are welcome, in my mind.

A weapon like the GPS completely 'ruins' shotguns. It's an excellent allround weapon - great up to SR range and still devastingly effective at close range. Switching weapons becomes counter-productive and therefore reduces the fun in my book. I definitely hope there will be no 'super' weapons in ME3 like the GPS, Mattock, and to a lesser extent the Locust.

I agree about the DLC weapons being a little overpowered but the context of my argument and LPPrince's is having a variety of weapon types to choose from.  Also they should all be balanced and have weaknesses.  The Mattock is probably going to be in ME3, my hope that it is balanced.  I like the uniqueness of the DLC weapons, what I dislike is the overpowerness of the three.

The Geth shotgun could be more balanced if it did negligent damage to armor and biotic barriers

The Locust is the least over powered of the three but perhaps it should have less total ammo and keep clip size.

The Mattock is probably needs less overrall damage.

The problem you bring up is the overpowered ness of the DLC weapons.  The problem I was discussing in my post is having more variety.  We are talking about different things here.

[CroGamer002]

^Locust is OP?

[AntiChri5]

How was it inferior to the pistols, assault rifles, and sniper rifles?

I know the pistols were the best weapons overall, but what about the other two?

All other weapon classes had better DPS and range then the shotgun.

[HTTP 404]

Mesina2 wrote...

^Locust is OP?

I don't really know, I use the tempest. haha

[Bozorgmehr]

HTTP 404 wrote...

I agree about the DLC weapons being a little overpowered but the context of my argument and LPPrince's is having a variety of weapon types to choose from.  Also they should all be balanced and have weaknesses.  The Mattock is probably going to be in ME3, my hope that it is balanced.  I like the uniqueness of the DLC weapons, what I dislike is the overpowerness of the three.

The Geth shotgun could be more balanced if it did negligent damage to armor and biotic barriers

The Locust is the least over powered of the three but perhaps it should have less total ammo and keep clip size.

The Mattock is probably needs less overrall damage.

The problem you bring up is the overpowered ness of the DLC weapons.  The problem I was discussing in my post is having more variety.  We are talking about different things here.

ME2 considers shields and barriers the same thing when it comes to weapons; the GPS has no bonus versus armor.

The Locust is effective at any range; it's more accurate and inflicts more DPS and DoT than most assault rifles. The other SMGs (Shiriken and Tempest) are very effective against shields/barriers up to short-medium range - they have strengths and weakness, the Locust doesn't have weaknesses. It's not game-breakingly OP, but it does have a big impact on gameplay-choice(s).

I don't see why shotguns have to be effective at increased range; it only makes other weapons that excell at those ranges less appealing which would be bad for overall gameplay imo. Your weapon selection should have an impact on how you play - weapons like the ME2 shotguns require risks to be taken in order to get close, but doing so made shotguns highly effective killing machines; staying safely behind cover results in crappy combat performance when you're using shotguns - those who favor that kind of playstyle should bring other weapons to the fight which suit their needs better.

I'd prefer more and highly specialized weapons so using the appropriate weapon when the time is right makes a huge difference.

[shumworld]

It's just me, but I really didn't like Shotguns in ME2. I didn't feel  comfortable with them. So I'm looking forward to seeing how they are treated in ME3.

Modifié par shumworld, 15 juin 2011 - 05:05 .

[Warkupo]

Shotguns *can* hit things at a fairly far range, they just have a lessened damage mod when doing this. It is not so much that you are missing, it is just that you aren't doing as much damage than if you ran up and fired the thing point blank.

Vanguard shines the most when using a Shotgun because their unique ability 'Charge' allows them to routinely get close enough to an enemy to maximize the amount of damage a Shotgun is capable of doing.

[Stardusk78]

shumworld wrote...

It's just me, but I really didn't like Shotguns in ME2. I didn't feel  comfortable with them. So I'm looking forward to seeing how they are treated in ME3.

You should practise more with them.

[GroverA 125]

Inferno Sock wrote...

Oh! oh! Im hoping for some range increasing Mods, not super far like ME1 (tho thatd be sweet!) but maybe double the range and a decreased spread, thats my hope for shotgun mods

Tho i hope they are longer range to begin with anyway tbh

I think that they should have a range close to MEs original style. Because really, why would you choose a shotgun at all if the kill radius is around ME2's style, even the eviscerator seemed weak in all but point-blank. If they aren't as effective as an assault rifle in total (balanced so that there's no "ultimate weapon type"), why would you use anything but an assault rifle. Same with pistols and hand cannons, I'd think that most, if not all people who aren't soldiers will not carry about a pistol if it is the same as it is in ME2, since it was a "no guns left" option, and all classes but soldiers would only use one if they only had a shotgun and targets are at long range, or etcetera.

Don't make it like an FPS, if we have the choice between them, they should at least be equal, or there's absolutely no point having them in-game. I mean, how many people do you see playing CoD running around with only a pistol, compared to those who lug about an assault rifle?

[Imperator Augustus]

Shotguns should really be powerful situational weapons. In the first Mass Effect, I thought they were perfect. With the exception of krogan and some of the higher level geth enemies, shotguns would kill most enemies in one or two shots at close range. Personally, I felt that they were a little underpowered in ME2; taking three or four shots to kill your average enemy is simply too much for a shotgun. I wonder how they are revamping them for ME3?

[GroverA 125]

Imperator Augustus wrote...

Shotguns should really be powerful situational weapons. In the first Mass Effect, I thought they were perfect. With the exception of krogan and some of the higher level geth enemies, shotguns would kill most enemies in one or two shots at close range. Personally, I felt that they were a little underpowered in ME2; taking three or four shots to kill your average enemy is simply too much for a shotgun. I wonder how they are revamping them for ME3?

I think that in ME2, they went and made them FPS-multiplayer balanced, meaning that they made it have a much bigger spread/damage drop-off with range. When I play through 2, the only time I've ever pulled out a shotgun is when I'm fighting only husks, I'm out of all my ammo (even my Phlanx), or I have a Geth Plasma Shotgun and it's medium range.

[jamesp81]

AntiChri5 wrote...

Mass Effect had the worst shotgun (and yes, despite all of the different names there was really only the one) of any game i have ever played. The only advantage it had over other weapons was that it had a bit more force, so knocking enemies down was easier. In all other aspects, it was simply inferior to all of the other weapons. When somethings only claim to fame is that it is easier to perma stun enemies with, you know you need to redo it.

Mass Effect 2 changed shotguns to be highly effective in certain situations (they now had an effectibe niche, giving you a reason to use them) with enough variety to even step outside this one limitation. A massive improvement.

Speak for yourself.  I used the shotgun extensively in Mass 1, but I almost never use them in Mass 2.  When I first played a sentinel, everyone told me to pick a shotgun on the Collector Ship.  I did, reloaded my save, and chose Assault Rifles / Mattock instead, and never looked back.

[KainrycKarr]

Stardusk78 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Inferno Sock wrote...

What about from a roleplaying perspective? seems kinda unrealistic to have such a limmited ranged weapon to me. or would some ingame mods to change the range from ME2 range to like level 1,2,3 and 4 kinds of range be ok since you wouldnt need to change them and you could majorly buff the damage rather than the range?

And this. In the future, you'd imagine that all shotguns would be shooting quite far and not be ineffective past 2 meters.

Then the shotgun is little different to an AR....terrible.

You are dense.

Shotgun has less ammo. Period. And won't have the fire rate of an AR, nor the accuracy. Just because you can shoot something from far doesn't mean it's accurate.

An AR is better at that range due to more ammo, auto/semi-auto, and overall more accurate for multiple, pinpoint kills.

If you want to see the difference, compare the AR's of ME2 to the GPS. That will give you a good feel for how it's different.

[Veex]

I really enjoyed the feel of shotguns of ME2. If they do alter them I hope their effectiveness at close range isn't drastically reduced in lieu of the new melee omni blade.

[AntiChri5]

Huh? There is only one part of my post that is attempting to speak for anyone (where i said that ME1 had the worst shotgun of any game i have ever played) and i was very clearly only speaking for myself.

The rest of the post is just facts about the weapons.