310 réponses à ce sujet

[CuseGirl]

What's wrong with ME-2's current shooterness? It think it's great, similar to Halo, simple controls (outside of the lack of jumping and the whole go-into-cover-before-you-jump-over-a-railing thing).

I hated Gears of War and CoD, could barely get thru 2 levels, the controls felt clunky and disconnected from my hands. Halo 3 was also slightly awkward because they moved around the weapon pickup buttons.

ME-2 just feels right and by giving you the button mapping options, i can fire out Warps and Singularities (or Shockwaves) whenever I want.

[Savber100]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Casey Hudson said during Comic-Con that they aren't aiming to be any kind of labeled RPG or basing it of something other RPGs may have done. They're trying to do make it the way they think an RPG should be like.

And honestly, I appreciate his honesty here as I believe that this has been the goal of ME from the start. Contrast that with DA where I believe the team betrayed the central priniciples that made DA:O great. 

The end result? 

I love ME2 because I excepted a more shooter-oriented RPG. 

I hate DA2 because I expected a stat-driven, tactical RPG. 

Modifié par Savber100, 24 juillet 2011 - 10:07 .

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
For recent examples, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Fallout: New Vegas and Alpha Protocol seemed to "get it" when it came to mixing shooter and RPG, and I'm not sure the Mass Effect camp do any more, or even want to. They seemed to when making ME1, but not so much now.

I haven't played human revolution, but New Vegas and AP have terrible mechanics. AP is actually worse than ME1, and New Vegas is on par (but has better RPG elements, obviously). 

Looking at two games that have terrible combat and saying they should be the inspiration for ME3 is... well, not good. 

I suppose this raises the question of whether Terror_K actually considers the mechanics in those games to be good.

[CuseGirl]

AlanC9 wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
For recent examples, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Fallout: New Vegas and Alpha Protocol seemed to "get it" when it came to mixing shooter and RPG, and I'm not sure the Mass Effect camp do any more, or even want to. They seemed to when making ME1, but not so much now.

I haven't played human revolution, but New Vegas and AP have terrible mechanics. AP is actually worse than ME1, and New Vegas is on par (but has better RPG elements, obviously). 

Looking at two games that have terrible combat and saying they should be the inspiration for ME3 is... well, not good. 

I suppose this raises the question of whether Terror_K actually considers the mechanics in those games to be good.

isn't that in the eye of the beholder/sniper/caster? Some people love certain games and certain setups.

[Bonereaver Karraji]

I think it's good that they're making it more similar to a fps because it enhances the game enviroment.

[Lumikki]

CuseGirl wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
For recent examples, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Fallout: New Vegas and Alpha Protocol seemed to "get it" when it came to mixing shooter and RPG, and I'm not sure the Mass Effect camp do any more, or even want to. They seemed to when making ME1, but not so much now.

I haven't played human revolution, but New Vegas and AP have terrible mechanics. AP is actually worse than ME1, and New Vegas is on par (but has better RPG elements, obviously). 

Looking at two games that have terrible combat and saying they should be the inspiration for ME3 is... well, not good. 

I suppose this raises the question of whether Terror_K actually considers the mechanics in those games to be good.

isn't that in the eye of the beholder/sniper/caster? Some people love certain games and certain setups.

Yes it is, every person see's situation from they point of view. How ever, You also have to consider what the game is and not just try to fit every game only the features you self like. Meaning what's good for you, as what you self want, isn't neccassary good for the game.

Modifié par Lumikki, 24 juillet 2011 - 10:27 .

[Nohvarr]

AlanC9 wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
For recent examples, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Fallout: New Vegas and Alpha Protocol seemed to "get it" when it came to mixing shooter and RPG, and I'm not sure the Mass Effect camp do any more, or even want to. They seemed to when making ME1, but not so much now.

I haven't played human revolution, but New Vegas and AP have terrible mechanics. AP is actually worse than ME1, and New Vegas is on par (but has better RPG elements, obviously). 

Looking at two games that have terrible combat and saying they should be the inspiration for ME3 is... well, not good. 

I suppose this raises the question of whether Terror_K actually considers the mechanics in those games to be good.

Well, TK's suggested in the past that the old KOTOR system would've been fine for ME 2's gameplay so it wouldn't surprise me if Terror_K did prefer those mechanics.

Alpha Protocol's system is more in-line with the kind of RPG TK seems to prefer, though I only give it credit for having so many varied choices and outcomes. That said, the fact that it's a standalone game instead of a part of a trilogy gave it certain story telling freedom that the previous ME games lacked so I can not rate it higher for that alone. I personally find AP's skill system to be less than ideal with too little payoff.

Deus Ex: HR appears to have a good set of mechanics behind the gameplay, however it is also a vastly different beast from Mass Effect. ME's never really been about stealth gameplay, and limited resources.Deus ex encourages you to find alternate paths by restricting your available resources. Deus Ex also dosen't give you control of a party.

I do find it funny to hear TK hold Deus Ex: HR up as an example of Action/RPG done right, because on their boards, many of the original Deus Ex fans seem to consider it a betrayl of Deus Ex, especially early on in development. The exact same arguments I see here about RPG vs action occured over there, which convinces me that, to date, the ME teams is right to proceed as they have.

Modifié par Nohvarr, 24 juillet 2011 - 10:30 .

[Varen Spectre]

Hm, this is slowly turning into a relatively interesting discussion. I like that. Especially the speculations about what is / was Mass Effect supposed to be.

Well, interviews, such as:

- interview with Chris Priestly (yay, maybe he himself can provide better explanation later:happy:) and Jay Watamaniuk in msxbox-world.com: 

"It was challenging to balance both elements but the hard work has paid off, and the result is what we believe is the best BioWare game we've made thus far. It was a fine balance of making the combat engaging and challenging without alienating hardcore RPGers."

- or interview with Casey Hudson in xboxgazette.com:

Combat in Mass Effect definitely has an intense and action-packed feel, but to actually play it is a very tactical experience with more of an RPG pacing. - snip - So combat in Mass Effect has the familiar and intuitive interface of a 3rd person shooter, but the pacing and tactical options that make RPG combat extremely challenging and fun!

... leads me to believe that back then, Bioware kind of wanted or at least was really satisfied with exactly that type of combat that we have seen in Mass Effect 1.

As for the change, well, we may try to speculate what was the reason or...

... we may try to believe what for example Christina Norman said about it in one of her video interviews, i.e. that the main reason was reviewers' and fans' feedback. I don't know guys, I wasn't here back then, and I did not read reviews for 1st Mass Effect, so I can not assess, whether this statement may or may not be truthful, but, they say in dubio pro reo, don't they. Besides, I have absolutely no reason not to believe Mrs. Norman or any other current or former employee of one of my favorite companies.

[AlanC9]

CuseGirl wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

In Exile wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
For recent examples, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Fallout: New Vegas and Alpha Protocol seemed to "get it" when it came to mixing shooter and RPG, and I'm not sure the Mass Effect camp do any more, or even want to. They seemed to when making ME1, but not so much now.

I haven't played human revolution, but New Vegas and AP have terrible mechanics. AP is actually worse than ME1, and New Vegas is on par (but has better RPG elements, obviously). 

Looking at two games that have terrible combat and saying they should be the inspiration for ME3 is... well, not good. 

I suppose this raises the question of whether Terror_K actually considers the mechanics in those games to be good.

isn't that in the eye of the beholder/sniper/caster? Some people love certain games and certain setups.

Yes, absolutely. Sometimes when I find out what somebody else likes, all I can do is hope that nobody at Bio listens to him. 

I'm just not quite clear what Terror_K's actually advocating in terms of mechanics.

Modifié par AlanC9, 24 juillet 2011 - 10:31 .

[Someone With Mass]

From what I've seen of Alpha Protocol's shooting mechanic, it's a even worse version of ME1's weapon system.

So, no thanks. As much as I like spending points when I level up, I like my elite soldier to be able to hit things regardless what weapon he's using or how early into the game he's using it.

So I can blame myself for missing and not the character. Because I can improve pretty quickly. A character who's accuracy and effectiveness are tied to skill points can't.

[Il Divo]

AlanC9 wrote...

You shoudn't give in to Gatt9's rhetoric. "Detested" isn't the level you need to get to before making changes to a design. Bio didn't have to "detest" BG1's map design to throw it out in favor of BG2's map design, which they've used up to the present day,

Point taken. I think the big thing to consider here is that Bioware choosing to alter ME2's design could be a result of any number of reasons. It could be due to EA, ME1's gameplay reception, lack of time in polishing ME1, etc. But the conclusion that Bioware was obviously pleased with ME1 as released is a necessary truth.

Inexile wrote...
I haven't played human revolution, but New Vegas and AP have terrible mechanics. AP is actually worse than ME1, and New Vegas is on par (but has better RPG elements, obviously). 

Looking at two games that have terrible combat and saying they should be the inspiration for ME3 is... well, not good. 

Agreed. Especially in the case of AP, but I would say neither game had satisfactory shooting mechanics. ME2's fluid aiming is a step above in that sense.

Modifié par Il Divo, 24 juillet 2011 - 10:53 .

[CuseGirl]

Someone With Mass wrote...

From what I've seen of Alpha Protocol's shooting mechanic, it's a even worse version of ME1's weapon system.

So, no thanks. As much as I like spending points when I level up, I like my elite soldier to be able to hit things regardless what weapon he's using or how early into the game he's using it.

So I can blame myself for missing and not the character. Because I can improve pretty quickly. A character who's accuracy and effectiveness are tied to skill points can't.

I didn't play ME-1 (PS3 user), how is it different from ME-2 (which is the best shooter experience I've ever had)? I didn't feel like ME-2 was hard to pickup at all.

[Someone With Mass]

CuseGirl wrote...

I didn't play ME-1 (PS3 user), how is it different from ME-2 (which is the best shooter experience I've ever had)? I didn't feel like ME-2 was hard to pickup at all.

Well, for one, the sniper rifle reticule had some annoying sway, and your starter assault rifle had literally 1% accuracy, which mean that your ability to hit the first enemies in the game was more based on luck than skill. It was even worse if you weren't specializing in assault rifles. Then it was pure luck if you could hit anything more than twice.

[AtreiyaN7]

In any war, I expect that existing military equipment/concepts would be the basis for any future equipment - just like those riot shields that look very much like ones modern-day civilian police officers and MPs use. The design works and provides as much coverage as you can get, also allowing you to form an effective wall (at least, that's why I assume that they use them). Do you think that artists should ignore reality just so that gamers have some dippy triangular riot shield with lights and sparkles that provides minimal coverage for the sake of being "unique"? I'd rather have a riot shield based on existing logical designs.

I don't think that games are ripping other games off. I think that many of them end up looking similar because A) artists are creating these things based on real-world examples (riot shields) or  they all derive inspiration from similar sources such as science-fiction books, movies, etc. Again, I'm going to cite The War of the Worlds - the book and movie incarnations. Here's a whole gallery of TWOT-related images: TWOT pics. One image in there is of a Protoss Colossus, which unsurprisingly, is being compared to the tripodal aliens.

[InvaderErl]

Savber100 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Casey Hudson said during Comic-Con that they aren't aiming to be any kind of labeled RPG or basing it of something other RPGs may have done. They're trying to do make it the way they think an RPG should be like.

And honestly, I appreciate his honesty here as I believe that this has been the goal of ME from the start. Contrast that with DA where I believe the team betrayed the central priniciples that made DA:O great. 

The end result? 

I love ME2 because I excepted a more shooter-oriented RPG. 

I hate DA2 because I expected a stat-driven, tactical RPG. 

Quoted for truth.

[collectorfreak]

I didn't like Dragon Age 2 as well because it tried too hard at being new and innovative.

Modifié par collectorfreak, 24 juillet 2011 - 11:37 .

[CuseGirl]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Well, for one, the sniper rifle reticule had some annoying sway, and your starter assault rifle had literally 1% accuracy, which mean that your ability to hit the first enemies in the game was more based on luck than skill. It was even worse if you weren't specializing in assault rifles. Then it was pure luck if you could hit anything more than twice.

interesting.....As a sentinel, I picked the Sniper, ugh, wut a mistake. Everytime I used one, I just kept getting shot when i poked my head out to shoot. I'm debating whether to do another Adept run or to try the Vanguard again (which this squad cryo strategy). 

I also read that the weapon inventory system was wonky because you had to decide which squad member got certain weapons instead of actually commanding the most advanced ship and crew in the galaxy (who should have no issue acquiring weapons).

[Il Divo]

KaidanWilliamsShepard wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

So the question isn't whether ME3 will rip off other games, the question is whether it's ripping off the wrong games

YES!
YES!
YES!
AND YES!

 So in terms of game mechanics, who should Bioware be borrowing from then? Mass Effect's gameplay was pretty weak, as released.

Modifié par Il Divo, 24 juillet 2011 - 11:31 .

[collectorfreak]

I'm glad people can talk about this again without flaming each other.

Modifié par collectorfreak, 24 juillet 2011 - 11:38 .

[CuseGirl]

KaidanWilliamsShepard wrote...

 The fact that they have only hinted at "added RPG elements" instead of actualy showing some, is kinda strange. This may just be me, but looking at the gameplay in Mass Effect 3, for some reason, i just don't see any room for RPG in there...maybe there will be, maybe i see it this way because a hybrid has never been done as successfully as they keep suggesting they have done...?
I don't know, but that is off topic, and we need to see more previews.

well why would they show us the RPG elements in the final installment of an RPG trilogy? You dont wanna reveal any of the story. Just showing people shooting means nothing. This game should also be LONGER than ME-2, so I doubt we'll have less story telling.

[collectorfreak]

I wonder how much story will be left this time.

Modifié par collectorfreak, 24 juillet 2011 - 11:44 .

[Lumikki]

CuseGirl wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Well, for one, the sniper rifle reticule had some annoying sway, and your starter assault rifle had literally 1% accuracy, which mean that your ability to hit the first enemies in the game was more based on luck than skill. It was even worse if you weren't specializing in assault rifles. Then it was pure luck if you could hit anything more than twice.

interesting.....As a sentinel, I picked the Sniper, ugh, wut a mistake. Everytime I used one, I just kept getting shot when i poked my head out to shoot. I'm debating whether to do another Adept run or to try the Vanguard again (which this squad cryo strategy). 

I also read that the weapon inventory system was wonky because you had to decide which squad member got certain weapons instead of actually commanding the most advanced ship and crew in the galaxy (who should have no issue acquiring weapons).

In general ME1 was excelent game. It just had few mistakes, like all games have. Even when people and I say here that TPS combat was bad in ME1, that doens't mean combat system did not work fine. It did the job just fine, but it wasn't really as someone could say good TPS. As for inventory and looting, it was more like in every normal RPG had, every item was induvidual. What cause player to do a lot of micro-management. It's not so bad in RPG perspective, but as cinematic action RPG perspective, it wasn't so good. Little like two different style conflicting each others.

How ever, some stuff in ME1 was even better than in ME2. Like story was more epic. Also ME1 had more impression details, what made game world feel more real. It also had few other gameplay variety like driving Mako. Maybe the driving wasn't the best, but as variety for gameplay it worked well.

So, weapon combat is better in ME2, but many other area ME1 did also do very well.

Modifié par Lumikki, 25 juillet 2011 - 08:06 .

[kidbd15]

Mass Effect is a shooter RPG... trying to make the best of both worlds is what it needs to do. It needs to be a great shooter and a great RPG. If that means taking cues from other great shooters, so be it, as long as it's also great RPG wise.