120 réponses à ce sujet

[CannonO]

sympathy4saren wrote...

I've been very vocal about my opinion on rpg elements, in particular skill trees, statistics and detailed modification/inventory.

At this point, I'm very optimistic by what I've seen. Of course, like everybody, I'm excited to see more, but I'm very happy with the progress I am seeing. Still plenty of time to add even more detail. Sofar, the interface looks efficient and the skills are definitely more extensive and seems to permit more customization in displacement of skill points.

Really encouraged, and I've been a very big critic. Hopeful to soon get word on exploration on exoplanets and non-mission planets. Those vistas need to be explored a tad

Good job, BioWare. Keep it up!

Good to know. I am having trouble judging which is why I am speaking out before it is too late. It is good to here someone else who has had concern is seeing an even brighter side to the pretty good newer systems.

But my absolute biggest concern is with the atmosphere, partially coming from those extra planets. I need to feel at least in a couple of places, as good as ME1 tried to make us feel in the clean parts of the citadel, or those clear and lens-flared side planets. I miss the old sleek side of the galaxy.

[LemurFromTheId]

Morroian wrote...

Aedolon wrote...

These games are above that. Shepard doesn't do FedEx quests.

No he/she does planet scanning instead. And anyway I reckon Ish's quest in ME2 qualifies as a fetch quest.

True enough.

Planet scanning was pretty stupid, though I maintain that it was more fun - and definitely less time-consuming - than Makoing those hard to reach places.

Morroian wrote...

Aedolon wrote...

...And here we truly disagree. ME2 was streamlined, but it didn't take anything away from the RPG.

These are my opinions: ME2 has less skills per class, but they are more varied, and they do more.

Because they added ammo powers, the fact is the tree allows for less customisation than ME1 and is shallower. Hell a game like Borderlands has more customisation.

Like I said, arguments can be made for both sides. ME2 has no ammo/weapon mods, so that clearly is one area were ME1 wins. But I don't see how having ammo powers means that the tree allows for less customisation.

Besides, it's not all about customization, it's also about freedom. Shepard is an N7 soldier, yet he doesn't know how to use shotguns or sniper rifles in the beginning of ME1. In fact, a shotgun / sniper rifle soldier is impossible or severely gimped build for much of the game. Vanguard is supposed to be a shotgun specialist, yet he can't use a shotgun in the beginning, while an adept or a sentinel can.

Hopefully they get rid of the locked powers entirely with ME3. I doubt that, though.

Can't comment on Borderlands, I have never played it.

[CannonO]

Aedolon wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Aedolon wrote...

These games are above that. Shepard doesn't do FedEx quests.

No he/she does planet scanning instead. And anyway I reckon Ish's quest in ME2 qualifies as a fetch quest.

True enough.

Planet scanning was pretty stupid, though I maintain that it was more fun - and definitely less time-consuming - than Makoing those hard to reach places.

Morroian wrote...

Aedolon wrote...

...And here we truly disagree. ME2 was streamlined, but it didn't take anything away from the RPG.

These are my opinions: ME2 has less skills per class, but they are more varied, and they do more.

Because they added ammo powers, the fact is the tree allows for less customisation than ME1 and is shallower. Hell a game like Borderlands has more customisation.

Like I said, arguments can be made for both sides. ME2 has no ammo/weapon mods, so that clearly is one area were ME1 wins. But I don't see how having ammo powers means that the tree allows for less customisation.

Besides, it's not all about customization, it's also about freedom. Shepard is an N7 soldier, yet he doesn't know how to use shotguns or sniper rifles in the beginning of ME1. In fact, a shotgun / sniper rifle soldier is impossible or severely gimped build for much of the game. Vanguard is supposed to be a shotgun specialist, yet he can't use a shotgun in the beginning, while an adept or a sentinel can.

Hopefully they get rid of the locked powers entirely with ME3. I doubt that, though.

Can't comment on Borderlands, I have never played it.

Do you really think scanning those planets was more fun than visiting and driving on the planets? I always hear the worst about planet scanning and I remember threads calling for a patch to remove it.

I loved some of the ME1 planets because while many were just a ground and sky texture apart, some of the combinations were beautiful and interesting and just felt like a real space planetside. I loved the moon and the time I found a field of animals with extra arms and the time I found a Prothean artifact shining in a valley. 

Some of my favorite imagery in my gaming history happened on a few of those planets. I just would love for more of those moments. That was part of the flaw, they just made most of them super similar. Changing it up would change the whole experience to me and bring some new love in my eyes.

[Cainne Chapel]

CannonLars wrote...

Uh, they put inventory in the vision from the start of the series. It absolutely fit when they promoted it as an RPG with shooter elements. There were many options that I enjoyed using before reaching the end of a playthrough. Multiple grenade types, different armors, interesting pistols and shotguns. It was all adding to the variety of characters that players could create. So many different stats, augmentations, looks, and approaches. It was a lot and an inventory fit. They just needed to do a better one.

ME3 sounds like a nice step, but I don't see how inventory wouldn't fit if done right since it fit in the vision of the series as they imagined it.

Thats true, the first ME1 did not exist in a void, but i'm assuming the reason they changed it, is because they're design philosophy felta more hands on combat model, would suit the series better in the long run.  I dont know, i'm not one of the devs, but regardless, the changed worked for most involved.

Also the game was, as far as I know, never meant as strictly an RPG with shooter elements, but an action packed Hybrid...which if you look at the way the system has been set up since mE1, combat played a LARGE part of it, making the combat tighter, and more fast paced I feel was better for the series as a whole and like i've said i LOVE ME1, but i VASTLY prefer the gameplay to ME2 now.  Having played both regularly.

Also, as with any sequel, they learn from past design issues and problems and work to tweak adjust accordingly. sometimes they go too far in one direction, sometimes they dont do enough.  It happens, we're all human (Mostly anyway)

Different armors are still there (For shepard anyway) in fact I believe, barring editors, there's more clothing/customization options for shepard than even in ME1.  Grenade mods ARE missing, but then thats why they gave us heavy weapons, and there is definately more variety there than the simple mods ME1 provided for the explosives.
and as said before, FAR more variety in terms of pistols/shotguns/ARs/SMGs/SNiper rifles in  ME2, Over ME1, as hard numerical stats mattered little in ME2, it was more about what weapon you liked the "Feel" of.   In ME 2 I can pick out/name a weapon easily, where as ME 1, they're all "Assault Rifle" or "Shotgun" no difference, No variety.  EXCEPT when you start loading in the mods.

and that is one thing i felt ME2 did a LOT better than ME1,  Weaponry was down to choice, not stats.

I myself Love the Vindicator or Mattock for most playthroughs, but I'm also very partial to the Kassa Locust and Incisor...But can you guess my favore ME1 Weapon? All SPectre Gear!   I mean Why would I use anything else?

[Gatt9]

Aedolon wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Aedolon wrote...

...And here we truly disagree. ME2 was streamlined, but it didn't take anything away from the RPG.

These are my opinions: ME2 has less skills per class, but they are more varied, and they do more.

Because they added ammo powers, the fact is the tree allows for less customisation than ME1 and is shallower. Hell a game like Borderlands has more customisation.

Like I said, arguments can be made for both sides. ME2 has no ammo/weapon mods, so that clearly is one area were ME1 wins. But I don't see how having ammo powers means that the tree allows for less customisation.

Besides, it's not all about customization, it's also about freedom. Shepard is an N7 soldier, yet he doesn't know how to use shotguns or sniper rifles in the beginning of ME1. In fact, a shotgun / sniper rifle soldier is impossible or severely gimped build for much of the game. Vanguard is supposed to be a shotgun specialist, yet he can't use a shotgun in the beginning, while an adept or a sentinel can.

Hopefully they get rid of the locked powers entirely with ME3. I doubt that, though.

Can't comment on Borderlands, I have never played it.

Because it's impossible to sacrifice combat skills in favor of a focus on noncombat skills?  You cannot make a mediocre soldier who excells at diplomacy in ME2.

Soldiers aren't trained in the use of every single weapon type.  It is not at all unrealistic to believe that Shepherd wouldn't know how to use shotguns or sniper rifles,  especially since you generally have to qualify before they give you a sniper rifle in most militaries,  it's kinda pointless to train you with it if you suck at shooting.

Now the vanguard makes no sense,  agreed.

[Cainne Chapel]

Well as an N7 Operative and one of the Alliance's top soldiers, Gatt, I Would imagine Soldier Shepard would have training in a wide array of standard issue weaponry. As thats his main mode of combat, to be ready with any weapon. AS he doesnt have his Tech or biotic skills to fall back on

Maybe not specialized training, but the man should be able to aim most weapons without having severe muscle ticks

I dont think its possible to make a mediocre soldier that excels at diplomacy in ME1 either.... fortunately i had the great luck of always having enough Paragon or Renegade scores in either that I could do both!

[rt604]

Someone With Mass wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

Face it. They wanted to broaden the appeal of Mass Effect for sales reasons so they streamlined it more towards a shooter market. Hence, they threw us an ammo limit, we lost weapon options, attachments, large skill trees, open exploration, and pristinely beautiful Mass Effect scenes that defined it.

Now we did still get our fantastic story and the scale we desire, but it the franchise took a very different turn and it took a large injection of shooter making it more like 50/50 RPGshooter instead of 80/20 RPG shooter.

I loved bigger skill trees and all the cool ammo types and armor attachments. It is a shame they took it away. Heck, even the little elevator dialogues added good RPG element to me.

Tell me you aren't serious, because ME1's power tree allowed for barely any customization at all. 

And that last comment just shows you haven't heard that there will be weapon customization in ME3, and it's looking a lot better than the generic weapon mods in ME1. Same with the armor.

ME1's skill tree had more skills, but if you are saying that ME2's skill tree was more customizable I disagree with that statement.  In ME2 you could only pick a variant of a power when you maxed it out, it was either larger area of effect or a more potent version of the skill.  In ME1, every power had 3 stages, beginner, advanced and master;  each of those stages allowed the power to increase in both potency and area of effect or duration, the player didn't have to pick one or the other.

[In Exile]

Gatt9 wrote...
Because it's impossible to sacrifice combat skills in favor of a focus on noncombat skills?  You cannot make a mediocre soldier who excells at diplomacy in ME2.

You can't do that in ME1 either, unless you avoid leveling up.

[rt604]

Aedolon wrote...

In ME1, every assault rifle (aside from the pulse rifle, perhaps) handled exactly the same way, they only had minor but steadily increasing stat differences. In ME2, every assault rifle handles differently, and optimally they should be used in a different manner. Vindicator and Revenant really are fundamentally different weapons that both allow and require different tactics.

In ME1, you always picked the best weapon available. In ME2, there isn't a best weapon, there are only different weapons. ME2 had much more variety in weapons, even if there weren't as many cosmetically different weapons. And I believe we can customize weapon colors in ME3?

Everyone in the audience who didn't prefer Spectre Master Gear, please stand up!

Just to be clear: I love ME1. I still play it - I finished my latest playthrough last week. ME2 just improved in pretty much all areas except writing.

I agree that the weapons in ME1 had much variety, but the only difference was the stats making it mute.  But the stats between the Master and beginning equipment made a huge difference in both taking damage and dishing out punishment especially on insanity.  

They didn't need so many variants in ME1, but at the same token, I don't like the fact in a game where you can finish the game with the exact same equipment that you that the character used in the beginning of the game.  As the game progresses, the challenges the team will face increase in both difficulty and frequency, the weapons and power of the team should progress as well to meet those challenges (ie You won't be taking down squads Geth Colossi on foot with an Avenger 1 AR).  Now, if mods do that to the weapons you had in the beginning  increase their effectiveness drasatically I can live with that type of gameplay, but it's kind of an opinion on gameplay mechanics more than anything else.

[Cainne Chapel]

Well hopefully RT you're using the Upgrades on said weapons which DO provide a noticeable increase in damage dealing and you COULD use the same weapon from beginning to end, but in reality the beginning weapons get upgraded pretty swiftly, although you may find you like the way a certain weapon handles more than others.

Which is just fine with me. Because for the life of me I just do not like the Revenant or the Claymore... despite they're high rate of fire and damage dealing capabilities

[LemurFromTheId]

CannonLars wrote...

I like your constructiveness here. That is my favorite kind of post, when someone lays out a system for other to read.

Thanks! I agree, it's fun to have a conversation with someone who puts thought in what they say, like you do.

CannonLars wrote...

A lot of the downtime allowed in the ME universe doesn't fit the plot. We were in a rush to stop Saren and the Collectors. Neither one should have allowed for so much downtime if they were so adamant on preserving the plot. I think the fact is that for them to allow exploartion at all that is gonna give players a tool for downtime. No matter how urgent things are, I don't want a linear rush where I can't visit every shop and npc.

This I can agree with. It doesn't really fit the plot, but it is just a game after all, so there should be some sensible compromise between freedom to do what you want and the progression of the main storyline. In ME1, wandering around was still somewhat plausible, and I think things were very well balanced. Besides, it was our introduction to the galaxy, so it makes sense we got to explore its wonders a little.

In ME2, the storyline is tightly focused on the characters, and we're interrupted with events we cannot ignore (Horizon, IFF), so I really feel there is even less space for exploration in ME2. But yes, some would have been nice.

On the other hand, the storyline was the major weakness of ME2 in my opinion, so with better writing, i.e. a vastly different story, exploration might have made a lot more sense.

CannonLars wrote...

Shepard is always on an urgent mission, but this game established exploration from day one, so it needs to stay and if it can bring back a better version of the day one product's exploration, which people shouldn't forget was part of the package that made this series a hit, then I hope they do bring it back.

This might also be a question of what people want from a sequel. Some want similar but better. Some want familiar but different and better. I prefer the latter, but it really is just a personal choice.

Besides, I'm not sure Bioware had a perfectly clear idea of the game when they made it. Sure, they had a fabulous vision of the universe, but the game mechanics themselves... I think they were a bit lackluster. The inventory might be an example of this: perhaps they included it because every RPG is supposed to have one, right?

Yet they removed it for ME2. ME1 indeed made the series a hit, but perhaps ME2 is actually closer to their original vision in terms of gameplay and RPG elements.

CannonLars wrote...

Lastly, as for loss of RPG. I think when they limited how many options we had, thus limiting the final character variations, they limited how much of an RPG it is.

I don't think they limited final character variations at all. Yes, there are less skill permutations, but because skills are much more distinct in ME2, they still cover a greater range.

In ME2, Overload does the job of both Sabotage and Overload from ME1. Yes, you cannot fine-tune it to the same degree, but consequentially, having this single skill makes much more difference. And you don't have skills like Combat Drone of Charge in ME1. Those skills affect the gameplay much more than damping, medicine and tactical armor combined.

Yes, in ME2 every class has less skills than in ME1, but that doesn't mean ME2 has less variation. Because you cannot evolve all of your skills, and because the choice of bonus power has potentially huge impact, the differences between two builds can be truly drastic.

CannonLars wrote...

Just because a pistol and a sniper are very different, doesn't mean I feel satisfied with the small amount of options those will grant me. I want ten pistols that look different and have different stats to make my final character go further in the direction I want. A small handful of weapons isn't near RPG level to me. ME1 was closer.

In ME1 all the pistols were same, they just got better during the game. You could never really make a meaningful choice between two different pistols, because they weren't truly different. And let's face it - you always finished with HMWP.

In ME2 you don't have a lot of choice, but you have a meaningful choice. Predator is fast with lots of ammo, great for husks. Carniflex is powerful, great against heavy armor. Phalanx has completely different aiming mechanism. Not to my taste, but great for sniping.

Same with shotguns: Claymore, Eviscerator, Katana, Scimitar. All different, all suit different style of play.

You may not be satisfied with the amount of options in ME2. I'm not satisfied with the amount of variation in ME1 - for there is none.

[LemurFromTheId]

Gatt9 wrote...

Because it's impossible to sacrifice combat skills in favor of a focus on noncombat skills? You cannot make a mediocre soldier who excells at diplomacy in ME2.

Yes you can. Just make a mediocre soldier and pick the right dialogue options.

I belong to the school that thinks diplomacy should be provided by the player, not the character sheet. You are free to disagree.

Gatt9 wrote...

Soldiers aren't trained in the use of every single weapon type. It is not at all unrealistic to believe that Shepherd wouldn't know how to use shotguns or sniper rifles, especially since you generally have to qualify before they give you a sniper rifle in most militaries, it's kinda pointless to train you with it if you suck at shooting.

Now, that's just not true.

I'm just a conscript (reconnaissance), and I've been trained with pistols, submachine guns, assault rifles, sniper rifles, machine guns, AA machine guns, recoilless rifles, knives, grenades and various kinds of AP and AV mines and improvised explosives. I missed shotguns because I was ill at the time.

Shepard is N7 operative. That's special forces combined with the highest available training.

I'm pretty sure Shepard should be pretty good with any weapon available.

[LemurFromTheId]

EDIT: Double post. Weird. Sorry about that.

Modifié par Aedolon, 21 juin 2011 - 02:14 .

[MonkeyKaboom]

While the limited skill development in ME2 was a little weird, I didn't mind so much as my vanguard still has all the powers I really wanted. What really drove me nuts was how if you took time away from the game between play through and forgot how many points everyone would earn, you would end up with that 1 point that you couldn't do anything with since you needed 3 or 4 to get another upgrade....I hated that.

[CannonO]

Aedolon wrote...

CannonLars wrote...

/snip

/snip

CannonLars wrote...

/snip

/snip

CannonLars wrote...

/snip

/snip

CannonLars wrote...

/snip

I don't think they limited final character variations at all. Yes, there are less skill permutations, but because skills are much more distinct in ME2, they still cover a greater range.

In ME2, Overload does the job of both Sabotage and Overload from ME1. Yes, you cannot fine-tune it to the same degree, but consequentially, having this single skill makes much more difference. And you don't have skills like Combat Drone of Charge in ME1. Those skills affect the gameplay much more than damping, medicine and tactical armor combined.

Yes, in ME2 every class has less skills than in ME1, but that doesn't mean ME2 has less variation. Because you cannot evolve all of your skills, and because the choice of bonus power has potentially huge impact, the differences between two builds can be truly drastic.

CannonLars wrote...

Just because a pistol and a sniper are very different, doesn't mean I feel satisfied with the small amount of options those will grant me. I want ten pistols that look different and have different stats to make my final character go further in the direction I want. A small handful of weapons isn't near RPG level to me. ME1 was closer.

In ME1 all the pistols were same, they just got better during the game. You could never really make a meaningful choice between two different pistols, because they weren't truly different. And let's face it - you always finished with HMWP.

In ME2 you don't have a lot of choice, but you have a meaningful choice. Predator is fast with lots of ammo, great for husks. Carniflex is powerful, great against heavy armor. Phalanx has completely different aiming mechanism. Not to my taste, but great for sniping.

Same with shotguns: Claymore, Eviscerator, Katana, Scimitar. All different, all suit different style of play.

You may not be satisfied with the amount of options in ME2. I'm not satisfied with the amount of variation in ME1 - for there is none.

But little looks and the fact that higher stat tiers of the gun does leave more up to me. If I wanted a specific pistol that was , say level VIII, I would look for it and strive to notice it. I am aware that the pistols and rifle and such had little difference in combat feelings, but for that reason you must understand that I am not casting aside the variety that is in ME2. I just wish they had kept the idea of different gun shapes and attachments and looks, because it mattered that I saw all those.

So burst vs. autofire rifles are a high contrast between eachother in ME2, but why can't I get a replacement to my burst rifle so I feel that progress or why not get one that has the traditional ME curved assault rifle look?

The systems should have wound together more, not have left the ME1 system in the dust.

And yeah, I picked HMWP but I am a near OCD nut with certain things aesthetically. In real life I don't buy clothes that have colors unless it is navy and the only red I can wear is red converse shoes, but otherwise I just have a system in my head, no graphic logos or anything. In Halo Reach I only use the default armor because it just fits this system in my head. For ME1, those spectre guns worked in my system, it has more to do with looks and certain vibes I imagine than the weapon ability. I'm odd, but in a good minimalist way for most things lol.

[kregano]

CannonLars wrote...
But little looks and the fact that higher stat tiers of the gun does leave more up to me. If I wanted a specific pistol that was , say level VIII, I would look for it and strive to notice it. I am aware that the pistols and rifle and such had little difference in combat feelings, but for that reason you must understand that I am not casting aside the variety that is in ME2. I just wish they had kept the idea of different gun shapes and attachments and looks, because it mattered that I saw all those.

So burst vs. autofire rifles are a high contrast between eachother in ME2, but why can't I get a replacement to my burst rifle so I feel that progress or why not get one that has the traditional ME curved assault rifle look?

Except there were no different gun shapes and attachments in ME1. Every class of gun had two modelss that were constantly reskinned in different colors, aside from the pulse rifle. That's why the inventory in ME1 was utterly worthless: everything was only different in the most minor and pointless ways that had absolutely no visible impact on gameplay.

In ME2, there's no point to replacing guns because you can upgrade the hardware to be better. I'll grant that aesthetically there was zero customization, but the overall weapons systems were far better in ME2 than ME1.

[CannonO]

kregano wrote...

CannonLars wrote...
But little looks and the fact that higher stat tiers of the gun does leave more up to me. If I wanted a specific pistol that was , say level VIII, I would look for it and strive to notice it. I am aware that the pistols and rifle and such had little difference in combat feelings, but for that reason you must understand that I am not casting aside the variety that is in ME2. I just wish they had kept the idea of different gun shapes and attachments and looks, because it mattered that I saw all those.

So burst vs. autofire rifles are a high contrast between eachother in ME2, but why can't I get a replacement to my burst rifle so I feel that progress or why not get one that has the traditional ME curved assault rifle look?

Except there were no different gun shapes and attachments in ME1. Every class of gun had two modelss that were constantly reskinned in different colors, aside from the pulse rifle. That's why the inventory in ME1 was utterly worthless: everything was only different in the most minor and pointless ways that had absolutely no visible impact on gameplay.

In ME2, there's no point to replacing guns because you can upgrade the hardware to be better. I'll grant that aesthetically there was zero customization, but the overall weapons systems were far better in ME2 than ME1.

You don't really switch anything in ME2 though, it is a linear upgrade line. ME1 may have mostly color skins, but that was part of my custom guns. I picked the look, the ammo, the upgrade, and kept searching for the better version or the one I wanted more.

[slimgrin]

I dunno, the the stat screen looks a lot like ME2 to me. 

Modifié par slimgrin, 21 juin 2011 - 01:41 .

[Bluko]

Moderator Insert:

Just thought I'd leave this in the OP so that people can take a look at what we saw in E3
Screen Captures from Mass Effect 3's Weapon Modding Screen and Abilities/Powers Menu- 25 images





Note: It's been confirmed by Devs that the Paragon/Renegade bars will NOT be there for the Squadmates

I'm more or less at content with the skill customization in ME2. And what we see here looks to be more in-depth in that you can actually modify how the abilities evolve. (Do they recharge faster or do more damage?) So this aspect of the game  looks pretty good.

My only real issue is that you still have "save points" to buy higher ranks it seems. To me it's preferred to spend talent points at each Level Up. So essentially every rank should cost 1 talent point. And I still fail to see why this can't be the case. (I hate leveling up and not being able to upgrade anything, it seems like a complete waste.)

[Cainne Chapel]

But you didn't pick the look, you lucked out and hopefully the new pistol would have Skin #2-a instead of #2-b.

Yeah it may be a minor visual aesthetic only, but in the greater scheme of things, it was, well, utterly worthless for the most part.

Most ME1 weapons had 1 of 2 skins (Using assault rifles here) which amounted to the Vindicator and Avenger ME2 skins and had either a shade of Gray, Black or if you're lucky Red.

So not really a WHOLE lot of variationt here compared to the 6 different skinned and acting ARs we got in ME2, granted they only come in one shade, but, overall, I think the choice is a LOT better.

and yes there's no stats per se, but the linearity was present in ME1 as well, only difference was it was built into each individual gun instead of being across the board.

[Aimi]

Bluko wrote...

My only real issue is that you still have "save points" to buy higher ranks it seems. To me it's preferred to spend talent points at each Level Up. So essentially every rank should cost 1 talent point. And I still fail to see why this can't be the case. (I hate leveling up and not being able to upgrade anything, it seems like a complete waste.)

It's obviously a game-balance feature to disincentivize builds that focus on fully leveling one, all-powerful, overwhelming power first (Charge, Adrenaline Rush, Tech Armor, whatever) and to encourage builds that stay relatively evenly distributed.

[CannonO]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

But you didn't pick the look, you lucked out and hopefully the new pistol would have Skin #2-a instead of #2-b.

Yeah it may be a minor visual aesthetic only, but in the greater scheme of things, it was, well, utterly worthless for the most part.

Most ME1 weapons had 1 of 2 skins (Using assault rifles here) which amounted to the Vindicator and Avenger ME2 skins and had either a shade of Gray, Black or if you're lucky Red.

So not really a WHOLE lot of variationt here compared to the 6 different skinned and acting ARs we got in ME2, granted they only come in one shade, but, overall, I think the choice is a LOT better.

and yes there's no stats per se, but the linearity was present in ME1 as well, only difference was it was built into each individual gun instead of being across the board.

Little looks are kind of crazy important to me. Gameplay is too of course, but I don't settle well if I can't get the look and combinations down just how I need them. ME2 should not have totally dropped it. No matter how small, if it exists, it exists. It was important to me and others who have defended several aspects of the system that were lost with ME2.

[Cainne Chapel]

I can understand that Lars, I'm absolutely OCD over my shepard's armor and must change it according to each specific Mission in ME2..... but that little detail from ME1 didn't bother me as much....

Possibly because the distinction between each weapon, visually was negligible....Red or black/gray, black/gray or Red, I ended up just not giving a hoot. I mean its not like you could customize each one, so it didnt bother me in the least to lose it, Especially since it was replaced by more varied weapons, both visually and gameplay wise.

That was a loss I could live with.

Luckily for you though, ME3 we can change the color AND camo of our guns AND have a variety to choose from both Visually and gameplay wise!

Rejoice!

[CannonO]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

I can understand that Lars, I'm absolutely OCD over my shepard's armor and must change it according to each specific Mission in ME2..... but that little detail from ME1 didn't bother me as much....

Possibly because the distinction between each weapon, visually was negligible....Red or black/gray, black/gray or Red, I ended up just not giving a hoot. I mean its not like you could customize each one, so it didnt bother me in the least to lose it, Especially since it was replaced by more varied weapons, both visually and gameplay wise.

That was a loss I could live with.

Luckily for you though, ME3 we can change the color AND camo of our guns AND have a variety to choose from both Visually and gameplay wise!

Rejoice!

I am glad to see some come back in ME3. I should really try to focus on that positive in this forum, but I am just trying to discuss the series thoroughly to help shape a path for a superior sequel.

[Lumikki]

ME2 droped it? You mean basicly same weapon with different skin look?

ME2 removed induvidual item upgrades and combinated them in general upgrades. How ever, different kind of weapons did not got lost.

The difference is like this:

ME1 (6 weapon in example):
Weapon A1, A2 and A3
Weapon B1, B2 and B3

ME2: (2 weapon and 3 upgrades)
Weapon A and B
Weapon ugrade 1, 2 and 3

Weapon A and B are same type of weapons. Thats' the difference between ME1 and ME2 design. What's the benefit of ME2 design? ME1 has,  items * upgrades = total amount of induvidual items. ME2 has it other ways,  items + type of items * upgrades = total amount of induvidual items. This means that when number of items and upgrades increase, inventory will be filled with amount of items in ME1, while ME2 still have less with same functionally. Only thing lost is manual upgrades as using old version of weapon. Second change was that every different item exist only ones in ME2, while same item can be multible times in ME1. This reduse more the need of inventory, what could have been avoid usually by stacking same items, what ME1 did not do.

Now what ME3 will bringing, that you can also mod every weapon too, little like you use to in ME1, but not as much.

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 juin 2011 - 02:48 .