3223 réponses à ce sujet

[Sarevok Synder]

EternalPink wrote...

for BG1 it might be possible we could take out drizzt after all and the cap was lvl 5 or 6 as i recall although you'd have to use cheat/console commands to get to a point to fight him

BG2 it wouldn't be possible since you start higher and the game won't allow you to fight although i suppose it might be possible with the console commands but by the time you encounter him you would have levelled anyway its just whether you spent the allocations etc

Which while i've not tested it i would have thought it would be the same for ME2 since even if you werent spending the squad points you'd still get the benefit of having gained a level (hp mainly but again i've never tested how much it would increase without spending the squad points)

Sarevok was a lot tougher than Drizzt. If you took him on at level 1; you wouldn't last a round. In BG2 you started at level seven or eight, if (and it's a big if) you managed to reach Irenicus without levelling up; you would be massacred in about a round.

There is little to no benefit to levelling in ME2. Anyone who's any good at shooters won't have to level.

[EternalPink]

We are going bit OT but if we are saying that people who are good at FPS's could possibley beat the game becuz its twitch combat (which i'm assuming you saying is a weakness of it being twitch) then I think its fair to say you can beat any turn based game by save/loading enough to beat the roll checks/resists.

For example

cast hold spell,if all enemies affected attack, else all saved against spell re-load fight

Think either would be rather unfun tho

[Sarevok Synder]

EternalPink wrote...

We are going bit OT but if we are saying that people who are good at FPS's could possibley beat the game becuz its twitch combat (which i'm assuming you saying is a weakness of it being twitch) then I think its fair to say you can beat any turn based game by save/loading enough to beat the roll checks/resists.

For example

cast hold spell,if all enemies affected attack, else all saved against spell re-load fight

Think either would be rather unfun tho

No, Sarevok could hit with every blow, with criticals most of the time. There was no armour strong enough to stop his attacks. I can beat ME2 without levelling; and I'm certainly not alone. No need for constant reloads either.

Let me know how that reloading with Irenicus goes; you will have died of old age before you get lucky.

[sp0ck 06]

Gatt9 wrote...
You illustrate my point.

The Miss factor is present because the RPG system models people's ability to dodge,  deflect,  and of armor to protect.

Being "Perfect" isn't fun,  it's one step away from the implementation of a Button that just kills everyone when you push it,  'cause waiting to see them die isn't fun.  

It's basically the equivalent of making sure that every time you pull the trigger in an FPS,  the bullet hits even if you didn't aim right.  

Please also note that I didn't use the word "Moron" anywhere in my post,  I made no assessment of anyone's intelligence.

Missing when I shoot someone with a shotgun at point blank range is not fun.  "Perfect?"  Only if you have superhuman reflexes.  You have to, you know, aim?  I would say a turn based system is much closer to a "win button."  A super high level character in, say, Fallout 3 will nail perfect headshots every time with VATS.  Having to actually hit your target regardless of how many stat points you allocated ensures that even with an "overpowered" character, there's still some input required from the player.  Making tactical decisions in real time is certainly more "realistic" than pausing, checking inventory, assigning target, and then...watching.  

The RPG system might "model" people's ability to dodge, etc...but the combat system of ME2 simulates it.  If you miss, you miss because you didn't aim, not because your stats weren't up to par.

Gatt9 wrote...

I mean honestly,  directly from ME2's loading screen,  "You have to talk to people if you want to have a Romance".  That sentence alone says a great deal about either Bioware's customers,  or EA/Bioware's opinion of their customers,  one of the two is on the low end,  Judging from most of this thread,  I'd venture it's EA.

These kind of statements would imply ME2 is catering to the "less intelligent"

[InvincibleHero]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Also if RPG elements can be lifted and put into other games without making those games RPG's surely by definition they are not the elements that make an RPG, they could be elements that were first developed in/for RPG's since there is now quite a lot of cross over (i.e character development in RTS games) but that doesn't make them exclusive.

I'm unsure where you are going with your bit about the lvl 2 mech, in every game i've ever played i've been able to kill the boss since that's generally the idea of the game, Jon Irenicus? Saverok? they both ended up pushing up daiseys

I believe the point being made was, in ME 2 levelling-up was redundant. Which is true, it is quite easy to complete the game with a level 1 character. Try to take on Irenicus or Sarevok with a level 2 any class and see what happens.

Try doing it without any upgrades then.

Is the D&D system really better? Is it realistic to get as many hit points as a dragon? Nope. In ME universe most people are in the same range of things like HPs. Do you think fighting things suddenly should allow you to absorb 10 bullets or 20 sword slashes to be D&D? Nope. It is an artificial construct to get players something to work for. It is a rewards/incentives system. I love D&D to death, but it is no paragon of a game system and realism not so much as well.

Equipment has just as much if not more impact as levelling in D&D. Try going with normal stuff at high level and see how long you last.

[konfeta]

RTS's are strategic, they require a grand strategy to achieve your goal while generally requiring minimal skill to get there, it's pretty much "Aim X at Y and wait to see what happens".

Um. Gatt, no offense, but if you are going to tell people to be less ignorant on a topic, you need to apply the same standard to yourself. Micromanaging your units in combat is anything but "minimal skill to get there," and there are players who become legendary because of their ability to micro in Starcraft.

You speak as if the "Upgrades" did something. At level 2 you kill a YMIR. At level 30, it'll still be the hardest thing you're fighting. None of those "Upgrades" were needed. You could've beat the game at level 2 without them.

At level 2, you have access to a few crappy skills. At level 30, you have a array of evolved powers, lowered cooldowns, squadmates, and additional weapons to dramatically speed up the rate at which you can go through in combat; you have overall more options. Even if it is just the +% upgrades you are talking about... Cooldown reduction is a dramatic boost to a Vanguard's aggression and survivability. +% damage dictated the viability of one shot one kill playstyles for weapons like Widow and Claymore. Heavy Weapon ammo increase could be the difference between one Cain shot and two Cain shots in an encounter.

There is more to progression than a binary "I can't kill at level 5, can kill at level 6." The progression is there. Just because it's not black and white doesn't mean you can act as if it doesn't exist.

ME2's main fault in terms of progression is that they did not sufficiently raise complexity and variety of enemy encounters as you approached later game material.

Modifié par konfeta, 14 juillet 2011 - 02:57 .

[InvincibleHero]

Gatt9 wrote...

The issue is that people keep trying to define LARPsing as RPG,  when they're two totally different concepts that only share a commenality in the use of one mechanic.  LARPS is not an RPG,  RPGs are very defined Roles,  LARPs are very freeform Roles,  completely different implementations.

What you've been defining as an RPG is actually a LARPs.  The conflict arises only because the LARPsing community has always been a fringe offshoot of the RPG community that wants to take it alot further than what RPGs do.

LARPS- I am my character
RPG- I play my character

Two completely different concepts. 

Your opinions and defining of what constitutes a role playing game is invalid since you parade it as fact.  Playing D&D, my sheet of paper with all those pretty stats does nothing. I am my character. He/she does what i want 100% of the time.  My paper does not make my d20 roll to hit and cannot save itself if I decide to light it on fire though I can look up save of paper vs. fire and guess what it will still burn to cinders and ash. That is the originator of D&D. You are just wrong on most things. You have some points but invalidate everything with such flawed reasoning.

It is a ruleset for people to do the roleplaying period. A CRPG simulates this by giving choices or having a morality system of some kind and having some RPGs mechanisms like levels and stats. It does need to have some type of both, but need not have all of them or even a majority to be considered an RPG. It is why I consider Diablo to not be RPG, but I don;t begrudge those that do. It is hack and slash and stats heavy, but still tacitly may be considered RPG. My opinion matters little and I don't treat it as be all end all as you do.

Modifié par InvincibleHero, 14 juillet 2011 - 03:45 .

[littlezack]

 Gatt9 wrote...

I mean honestly,  directly from ME2's loading screen,  "You have to talk to people if you want to have a Romance".  That sentence alone says a great deal about either Bioware's customers,  or EA/Bioware's opinion of their customers,  one of the two is on the low end,  Judging from most of this thread,  I'd venture it's EA.

I'm fairly certain it was meant as a joke.

[Foolsfolly]

Gonna take this back a page:

As if XP/kill isn't the most idiotic way to convey progression, well, ever?

This is one aspect where I honestly don't care ME2 did it badly - they at least removed the stupidest part of any RPG.

XP per kill is a staple and I didn't care that it was removed from ME2. What I didn't like, however, was that there's no passive or non-kill way through missions. Since ME2 gives XP for finishing missions instead of combat this could allow for missions where certain choices or play styles would avoid combat and that not be punished by less experience than the guy who ran in with the grenade launcher blowing everything apart.

I really wish there was side passages, stealth, and ways to bluff your way past guards and encounters in some missions. That way each Shepard could be totally different and do whatever that character would do. While still rewarding the same amount of XP.

The XP for finishing missions instead of XP for kills is a great way to give XP to players in RPGs. It removes the grinding aspect of RPGs (which is boring) and you no longer have to be deadlier than the Black Plague to reach the level cap. Although, you can still totally kill any and everyone.

It's a far more balanced method of XP rewarding.

[Sarevok Synder]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Also if RPG elements can be lifted and put into other games without making those games RPG's surely by definition they are not the elements that make an RPG, they could be elements that were first developed in/for RPG's since there is now quite a lot of cross over (i.e character development in RTS games) but that doesn't make them exclusive.

I'm unsure where you are going with your bit about the lvl 2 mech, in every game i've ever played i've been able to kill the boss since that's generally the idea of the game, Jon Irenicus? Saverok? they both ended up pushing up daiseys

I believe the point being made was, in ME 2 levelling-up was redundant. Which is true, it is quite easy to complete the game with a level 1 character. Try to take on Irenicus or Sarevok with a level 2 any class and see what happens.

Try doing it without any upgrades then.

Is the D&D system really better? Is it realistic to get as many hit points as a dragon? Nope. In ME universe most people are in the same range of things like HPs. Do you think fighting things suddenly should allow you to absorb 10 bullets or 20 sword slashes to be D&D? Nope. It is an artificial construct to get players something to work for. It is a rewards/incentives system. I love D&D to death, but it is no paragon of a game system and realism not so much as well.

Equipment has just as much if not more impact as levelling in D&D. Try going with normal stuff at high level and see how long you last.

Get real; weapon and armour upgrades were as redundant in ME2 as levelling. That was the whole point of my run, I wanted to see if it could be done without any increase from base power. I wasn't only possible, it was easy.

Having something to aim for level wise is the whole point. If that isn't there, why bother with levelling or upgrades at all? It's just there to give the illusion of something to aim for, nothing more.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 14 juillet 2011 - 07:15 .

[Bnol]

konfeta wrote...

You speak as if the "Upgrades" did something. At level 2 you kill a YMIR. At level 30, it'll still be the hardest thing you're fighting. None of those "Upgrades" were needed. You could've beat the game at level 2 without them.

At level 2, you have access to a few crappy skills. At level 30, you have a array of evolved powers, lowered cooldowns, squadmates, and additional weapons to dramatically speed up the rate at which you can go through in combat; you have overall more options. Even if it is just the +% upgrades you are talking about... Cooldown reduction is a dramatic boost to a Vanguard's aggression and survivability. +% damage dictated the viability of one shot one kill playstyles for weapons like Widow and Claymore. Heavy Weapon ammo increase could be the difference between one Cain shot and two Cain shots in an encounter.

There is more to progression than a binary "I can't kill at level 5, can kill at level 6." The progression is there. Just because it's not black and white doesn't mean you can act as if it doesn't exist.

ME2's main fault in terms of progression is that they did not sufficiently raise complexity and variety of enemy encounters as you approached later game material.

Just to add on to this.  Sure you might kill 1 YMIR mech by itself at level 2 but the rate of killing it is much slower and usually for me at least one of my squadmates bites the dust.   Later, you end up having situations where you are fighting troops plus the mech, and situations where you fight multiple mechs.  Thus you are being put in more difficult situations as the game progresses.  I mean the alternative would be just fighting generic troops until you are level 15 before you fight your first YMIR mech, but that would end up being fairly stale.  That alternative would not even work considering the freedom the player has in the order to do missions. 

For most games enemies gain strength as you advance.  Upgrades are there, but don't really do much relative to the enemies you are facing, sure you do bigger damage numbers or hit more often but the enemy will just have a larger health pool.  If this was not the case the game would become easy rather quickly.  The only thing upgrades really do in terms of progression is alter playstyle, but they do in ME2 based on the upgrades and advancements discussed in the above quote.  Unless of course you take the time to grind out a bunch of levels to get ahead of the game, but I don't find that interesting gameplay and would rather keep the challenge in the game by avoiding grinding, which is why I much prefer the enemy scaling systems. 

[Savber100]

So remind why this a ME3-related topic seeing that we haven't seen enough about ME3's RPG elements.to actually come into a conclusion.

Shouldn't this belong in the ME/ME2 forum or the Off-topic forums?

Just wondering...

[vader da slayer]

littlezack wrote...

 Gatt9 wrote...

I mean honestly,  directly from ME2's loading screen,  "You have to talk to people if you want to have a Romance".  That sentence alone says a great deal about either Bioware's customers,  or EA/Bioware's opinion of their customers,  one of the two is on the low end,  Judging from most of this thread,  I'd venture it's EA.

I'm fairly certain it was meant as a joke.

agreed, its right up there with "Dont stand in fire" and "Its great to bring your friends to Azeroth but make sure to go outside with them too"

[InvincibleHero]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Also if RPG elements can be lifted and put into other games without making those games RPG's surely by definition they are not the elements that make an RPG, they could be elements that were first developed in/for RPG's since there is now quite a lot of cross over (i.e character development in RTS games) but that doesn't make them exclusive.

I'm unsure where you are going with your bit about the lvl 2 mech, in every game i've ever played i've been able to kill the boss since that's generally the idea of the game, Jon Irenicus? Saverok? they both ended up pushing up daiseys

I believe the point being made was, in ME 2 levelling-up was redundant. Which is true, it is quite easy to complete the game with a level 1 character. Try to take on Irenicus or Sarevok with a level 2 any class and see what happens.

Try doing it without any upgrades then.

Is the D&D system really better? Is it realistic to get as many hit points as a dragon? Nope. In ME universe most people are in the same range of things like HPs. Do you think fighting things suddenly should allow you to absorb 10 bullets or 20 sword slashes to be D&D? Nope. It is an artificial construct to get players something to work for. It is a rewards/incentives system. I love D&D to death, but it is no paragon of a game system and realism not so much as well.

Equipment has just as much if not more impact as levelling in D&D. Try going with normal stuff at high level and see how long you last.

Get real; weapon and armour upgrades were as redundant in ME2 as levelling. That was the whole point of my run, I wanted to see if it could be done without any increase from base power. I wasn't only possible, it was easy.

Having something to aim for level wise is the whole point. If that isn't there, why bother with levelling or upgrades at all? It's just there to give the illusion of something to aim for, nothing more.

So did you do it on insanity or casual? So you picked up no upgrades right or added armor pieces that gave better bonuses? Did you also use the basic weapons and armor? If you can do it show video of just Horizon level on insanity. If it is so easy you should never have to reload either. In fact send your squadmates away and go lone wolf since it is so easy. Many times on hardcore just one rocket to the face was enough to die.

The original A D&D which capped hit point rolls at name level 9 made the game challenging because you could be one-shot by many monsters. If you didn't gain max hit points you likewsie would not stand a chance in the CRPGs. You want to say easy soloing NWN killing Red dragons, a clan of fire giants makes the whole game lose meaning. Where is the threat?  Monty haul ruins any immersion and having 300+ hps does as well.

I like the fact you can die very quickly in ME2 with poor tactics. It adds tension to the fights which is sorely lacking in any D&D crpg to date excepting Demogorgon in TOB which was fairly difficult. Sarevok was a pushover never beat me in any playthrough Kangaxx was much tougher. I don't like taking hundreds of hits and still standing like my PC was Superman or quaffing full heals while having regeneration out the yin yang. Making high level mobs means you just inflate them to be a threat when reasonable stats and less levels were all that is necessary. Ten levels is really all D&D needs and you could scale every mob accordingly. That is what they appear to have done with ME2. Makes every battle more even with few pushovers which get boring.

Stand in the open and you'll be dead in 2-3 seconds or so. In NWN I could go get a sandwhich and my PC would still be alive when I got back. You likely exploit the AI to claim it is easy.

Modifié par InvincibleHero, 14 juillet 2011 - 09:49 .

[Someone With Mass]

littlezack wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

I mean honestly, directly from ME2's loading screen, "You have to talk to people if you want to have a Romance". That sentence alone says a great deal about either Bioware's customers, or EA/Bioware's opinion of their customers, one of the two is on the low end, Judging from most of this thread, I'd venture it's EA.

I'm fairly certain it was meant as a joke.

All I got from that was "Whaaaa, I must feel smarter than the average human to enjoy a game" which is just sad on its own level.

If you want to feel so superior over other people on the intellectual level, go play a game of chess instead and leave people who just want to be entertained by the games they play alone.

[Foolsfolly]

Someone With Mass wrote...

littlezack wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

I mean honestly, directly from ME2's loading screen, "You have to talk to people if you want to have a Romance". That sentence alone says a great deal about either Bioware's customers, or EA/Bioware's opinion of their customers, one of the two is on the low end, Judging from most of this thread, I'd venture it's EA.

I'm fairly certain it was meant as a joke.

All I got from that was "Whaaaa, I must feel smarter than the average human to enjoy a game" which is just sad on its own level.

If you want to feel so superior over other people on the intellectual level, go play a game of chess instead and leave people who just want to be entertained by the games they play alone.

A game of chess where you roll die to see if you take the other player's piece or not.

Checkmate!

::rolls die::

Damn, I missed! 

[Sarevok Synder]

InvincibleHero wrote...

So did you do it on insanity or casual? So you picked up no upgrades right or added armor pieces that gave better bonuses? Did you also use the basic weapons and armor? If you can do it show video of just Horizon level on insanity. If it is so easy you should never have to reload either. In fact send your squadmates away and go lone wolf since it is so easy. Many times on hardcore just one rocket to the face was enough to die.

The original A D&D which capped hit point rolls at name level 9 made the game challenging because you could be one-shot by many monsters. If you didn't gain max hit points you likewsie would not stand a chance in the CRPGs. You want to say easy soloing NWN killing Red dragons, a clan of fire giants makes the whole game lose meaning. Where is the threat?  Monty haul ruins any immersion and having 300+ hps does as well.

I like the fact you can die very quickly in ME2 with poor tactics. It adds tension to the fights which is sorely lacking in any D&D crpg to date excepting Demogorgon in TOB which was fairly difficult. Sarevok was a pushover never beat me in any playthrough Kangaxx was much tougher. I don't like taking hundreds of hits and still standing like my PC was Superman or quaffing full heals while having regeneration out the yin yang. Making high level mobs means you just inflate them to be a threat when reasonable stats and less levels were all that is necessary. Ten levels is really all D&D needs and you could scale every mob accordingly. That is what they appear to have done with ME2. Makes every battle more even with few pushovers which get boring.

Stand in the open and you'll be dead in 2-3 seconds or so. In NWN I could go get a sandwhich and my PC would still be alive when I got back. You likely exploit the AI to claim it is easy.

What's with the wall of text? This isn't rocket science. I beat it on hardcore without levelling or upgrades. It's too boring to bother with another run. My point is simple; its game-play mechanics are shooter based. The "levelling" was a waste of time, it was no longer necessary. It was kept in to try make it look less like a pure shooter. Nobody could beat Sarevok without levelling, yet I could beat ME2 without doing so.

BTW, NWN was awful. And no I'm not going to do a YouTube video for you; because to be quite honest, I couldn't care less if you believe me or not.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 14 juillet 2011 - 10:21 .

[Someone With Mass]

ME1 forced you to level up (i.e. grind out every single little side mission there was and forced you to jump out of the Mako to get the final blow all the time) in order to reach the highest level and to be effective with weapons one would think Shepard would already be effective with, seeing how he's a highly trained elite soldier.

I don't like tedious grinding. At all. ME2 made it flow easier, and even if I became highest level rather early, I still thought it was a vast improvement over ME1, and I also like the way they're taking it in ME3, where you're rewarded greatly if you're taking your time by doing a lot of side missions.

[Sarevok Synder]

Someone With Mass wrote...

ME1 forced you to level up (i.e. grind out every single little side mission there was and forced you to jump out of the Mako to get the final blow all the time) in order to reach the highest level and to be effective with weapons one would think Shepard would already be effective with, seeing how he's a highly trained elite soldier.

I don't like tedious grinding. At all. ME2 made it flow easier, and even if I became highest level rather early, I still thought it was a vast improvement over ME1, and I also like the way they're taking it in ME3, where you're rewarded greatly if you're taking your time by doing a lot of side missions.

Exactly, levelling wasn't required in ME2.

[Someone With Mass]

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Exactly, levelling wasn't required in ME2.

It wasn't required in ME1 either with that logic. 

You'll just be more effective as you level up.

[SpiffySquee]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

So did you do it on insanity or casual? So you picked up no upgrades right or added armor pieces that gave better bonuses? Did you also use the basic weapons and armor? If you can do it show video of just Horizon level on insanity. If it is so easy you should never have to reload either. In fact send your squadmates away and go lone wolf since it is so easy. Many times on hardcore just one rocket to the face was enough to die.

The original A D&D which capped hit point rolls at name level 9 made the game challenging because you could be one-shot by many monsters. If you didn't gain max hit points you likewsie would not stand a chance in the CRPGs. You want to say easy soloing NWN killing Red dragons, a clan of fire giants makes the whole game lose meaning. Where is the threat?  Monty haul ruins any immersion and having 300+ hps does as well.

I like the fact you can die very quickly in ME2 with poor tactics. It adds tension to the fights which is sorely lacking in any D&D crpg to date excepting Demogorgon in TOB which was fairly difficult. Sarevok was a pushover never beat me in any playthrough Kangaxx was much tougher. I don't like taking hundreds of hits and still standing like my PC was Superman or quaffing full heals while having regeneration out the yin yang. Making high level mobs means you just inflate them to be a threat when reasonable stats and less levels were all that is necessary. Ten levels is really all D&D needs and you could scale every mob accordingly. That is what they appear to have done with ME2. Makes every battle more even with few pushovers which get boring.

Stand in the open and you'll be dead in 2-3 seconds or so. In NWN I could go get a sandwhich and my PC would still be alive when I got back. You likely exploit the AI to claim it is easy.

What's with the wall of text? This isn't rocket science. I beat it on hardcore without levelling or upgrades. It's too boring to bother with another run. My point is simple; its game-play mechanics are shooter based. The "levelling" was a waste of time, it was no longer necessary. It was kept in to try make it look less like a pure shooter. Nobody could beat Saravok without levelling, yet I could beat ME2 without doing so.

BTW, NWN was awful. And no I'm not going to do a YouTube video for you; because to be quite honest, I couldn't care less if you believe me ar not.

First of all, you CAN beat Irenicus or Serovock at first level if you know how to play the system. I did an LP where I killed Irencus without taking any damage. I set up every trap I had while he was sucking the tree of life dry and they went off before he could raise defenses. One magic missile after that and "Poof" battle over. This could have been done at level 6 or seven if I wished as long as I have a few thieves in the party (that's what level you start he game at, so there is no reason to even talk about level one) 

Proof:


Skip to 9:45 to see what I was talking about.

Does this now mean leveling was redundant? No. It just means leveling make it easier. 
Secondly, if you say ME2 Hardcore was easy with no leveling, no upgrades (and no leveling squad mates) you are either a gaming savant or lying through your teeth. Can't say which, but until you post a video with the proof, I'm leaning towards the second one. Is it possible? Yeah. Is it simple and easy? No way in hell.

Modifié par SpiffySquee, 14 juillet 2011 - 10:27 .

[Sarevok Synder]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Exactly, levelling wasn't required in ME2.

It wasn't required in ME1 either with that logic. 

You'll just be more effective as you level up.

No, because with the Mechanics of ME1, levelling was required to use weapons effectively. In ME2, if you're any good at shooters; it's not needed. I just wish people would drop the charade that levelling in ME2 made any real difference.

[Sarevok Synder]

SpiffySquee wrote...

First of all, you CAN beat Irenicus or Serovock at first level if you know how to play the system. I did an LP where I killed Irencus without taking any damage. I set up every trap I had while he was sucking the tree of life dry and they went off before he could raise defenses. One magic missile after that and "Poof" battle over. This could have been done at level 6 or seven if I wished as long as I have a few thieves in the party (that's what level you start he game at, so there is no reason to even talk about level one) 

Proof:


Skip to 9:45 to see what I was talking about.

Does this now mean leveling was redundant? No. It just means leveling make it easier. 
Secondly, if you say ME2 Hardcore was easy with no leveling, no upgrades (and no leveling squad mates) you are either a gaming savant or lying through your teeth. Can't say which, but until you post a video with the proof, I'm leaning towards the second one. Is it possible? Yeah. Is it simple and easy? No way in hell.

The guy in that video was way above level six. You can tell bald faced lies on somebody else’s time.

Sure I died a few times, but yeah; It can be done.

Modifié par Sarevok Synder, 14 juillet 2011 - 10:33 .

[Someone With Mass]

Sarevok Synder wrote...
No, because with the Mechanics of ME1, levelling was required to use weapons effectively. In ME2, if you're any good at shooters; it's not needed. I just wish people would drop the charade that levelling in ME2 made any real difference.

And that's exactly what I think was so stupid in ME1. It clashed with Shepard's character so much, it wasn't even funny.

Like with Infiltrator. I had to resort to using my pistol until I had enough points to invest in the sniper rifles so Shepard could line up a shot without sway all the goddamn time. That's not fun nor does it serve any purpose whatsoever. It's just annoying.

And leveling up in ME2 can let you unlock new powers or improve the ones you already have. Just like in ME1, but without the weapon skills, as they come in from of upgrades you can buy at a store or find on missions.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 14 juillet 2011 - 10:37 .

[SpiffySquee]

Sarevok Synder wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Sarevok Synder wrote...
Exactly, levelling wasn't required in ME2.

It wasn't required in ME1 either with that logic. 

You'll just be more effective as you level up.

No, because with the Mechanics of ME1, levelling was required to use weapons effectively. In ME2, if you're any good at shooters; it's not needed. I just wish people would drop the charade that levelling in ME2 made any real difference.

Take a level 1 infiltrator with the default sniper rifle, cloak if you can, and hit Harbinger in the head. Then do the same thing with a level 30 infiltrator and a widow. Gee.... your right... leveling made no difference what so ever... guess I should drop the charade....
Proving that it is possible to beat something without leveling does not make it pointless. Military training is not necessary to send someone into battle. Heck, they may even live, but that does not mean Military training is pointless.