6494 réponses à ce sujet

[sbvera13]

dreman9999 wrote...

But what if it was a shoot gun instead. Shoot guns have fantasic dps. Also, ME hand guns have monstorus dps.

Same concept still applies.  If your personal skill has you shooting at lets say 50% accuracy, then you have 50% time-on-target to apply dps.  Replace some of the cooling mods with DMG increasing mods until you get about 50% heat efficiency on your weapon.   Your applied DPS will climb.  The weapon type is unimportant.

Modifié par sbvera13, 08 septembre 2011 - 08:25 .

[dreman9999]

sbvera13 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

So making sure you don't run out of bullets by aim correctly and not waste shots is it not resourse Management?

No. That's just accuracy.  Resource management is choosing which resource to use at which time, to best achieve your goals.

Sorry, but if I make sure may shots are right and take out may target before I run out of bullets,I'm more midful of it because my bulletsare limited. Hencethe point they are trying to make.

[Someone With Mass]

sbvera13 wrote...

Go back to the original thread, linked on page 146, where I address both of those issues. In short, both of the things you describe limit player choice and flatten gameplay.

By that logic, the level progression should also "flatten" the gameplay since it's also limiting the player's choice. But it doesn't.

[Iakus]

Someone With Mass wrote...

iakus wrote...

All right.  It helped that Jensen wasn't dead for weeks when the augments were put in.

I believe Redemption takes place a month or so after the Normandy's destruction.

Point is, while Jensen's augs were life-saving, they did not reverse death.

Yes, but there still no need to learn what every specific part does.

I'd say there was less need.  It requires less suspension to believe cybernetics could allow someone to see through a wall, run faster, or interface more effectively with a computer, than to restore the dead.

And even so, you could always look at the "more information" section for a brief description of a given aug.

[Nashiktal]

iakus wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

iakus wrote...

It helped that Jensen wasn't dead for two years when the augments were put in...

It took them two years to bring Shepard back. They presumably started to work on his body a short while after his death, and that work took two years.

All right.  It helped that Jensen wasn't dead for weeks when the augments were put in.

I believe Redemption takes place a month or so after the Normandy's destruction.

Point is, while Jensen's augs were life-saving, they did not reverse death.

Not to mention sheps cells were dead. Also if he was frozen, the damage that would do to any cells that "might" have lived. If shep was frozen, that would preserve him for eating maybe, but the cells would still be dead.

[111987]

100k wrote...

As for Shepard's armor, I'm not sure about that one. How was the body depicted in Mass Effect: Redemption? Was the armor intact there, or already broken? If it was intact in the comic, then it could have been the heat of rentry fused the armor and the flesh together, so the armor had to be cut off. But you raise a valid point.

I dunno if the comic is to be considered 100% canon. I wouldn't be surprised if it showed Shepard with a N7 chest place, helmet, and shoulder pieces.

Well in that case, this is indeed an issue. If Shepard's armor was in pieces after impact, then his body should have been in a much worse condition than it was.

[dreman9999]

sbvera13 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

But what if it was a shoot gun instead. Shoot guns have fantasic dps. Also, ME hand guns have monstorus dps.

Same concept still applies.  If your personal skill has you shooting at lets say 50% accuracy, then you have 50% time-on-target to apply dps.  Replace some of the cooling mods with DMG increasing mods until you get about 50% heat efficiency on your weapon.   Your applied DPS will climb.  The weapon type is unimportant.

You can do this with the stongest guns in the game and it wouldhave little consiquence....
http://www.xbox360ch...ut_Overheating/

.What would it matter if you can't get the max dps if you traget can't hurt you and you sit back and wittle it down. That the proble with ME1's system....You could take any gun and take you time with no contest.

[sbvera13]

Someone With Mass wrote...

By that logic, the level progression should also "flatten" the gameplay since it's also limiting the player's choice. But it doesn't.

I don't see how that applies... you'll have to explain more.

[Sgt Stryker]

Fixers0 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Sure they can, but they cannot just invent things up out of supposition and state is as objective fact.

But calling everything a retroactive continuity simply based on the lack of knowledge is alright?

If the Codex explicitly mentions that it is A, and the narative ends up doing B, it isn't a Retcon?

No. It's only a retcon if B contradicts A. In the Codex, kinetic barriers are said to perform function A (stopping fast-moving small objects). In gameplay and cutscenes, we see mass effect fields that can perform functions A (stop bullets) and B (hold in atmosphere). This is not a retcon. Cutscenes, gameplay, and codex are all parts of the whole narrative. In fact, the Codex supplements the main narrative, not the other way around.

Going back to my Sovereign example: The Codex states that Sovereign is A) a massive dreadnought, Saren's flagship, and C) the most technologically advanced ship in the galaxy. In the actual story, we discover these 3 facts as well, but we also discover that Sovereign is D) a Reaper. Does this mean that if the Codex says A, B, and C about Sovereign, and the game itself says that Sovereign is A, B, C, and D, then this is a retcon as well?

Absolutely not.

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

sbvera13 wrote...

The ammo system as designed didn't encourage resource management anyway, since there's effectively only 1 resource there's no management.

So making sure you don't run out of bullets by aim correctly and not waste shots is it not resourse Management?

You aim to hit the target.  You hit the target to kill it.  You kill the target to survive and win. 

I don't need same-old-ammo-system to make me not want to waste 90% of my shots on spraying and praying. 

[Sgt Stryker]

111987 wrote...

100k wrote...

As for Shepard's armor, I'm not sure about that one. How was the body depicted in Mass Effect: Redemption? Was the armor intact there, or already broken? If it was intact in the comic, then it could have been the heat of rentry fused the armor and the flesh together, so the armor had to be cut off. But you raise a valid point.

I dunno if the comic is to be considered 100% canon. I wouldn't be surprised if it showed Shepard with a N7 chest place, helmet, and shoulder pieces.

Well in that case, this is indeed an issue. If Shepard's armor was in pieces after impact, then his body should have been in a much worse condition than it was.

In LotSB, you get a glimpse of the state of Shepard's old armor. It did have several fractures, but not what I would call "in pieces." Curiously enough, it also was not scorched or burned....

[100k]

111987 wrote...

100k wrote...

As for Shepard's armor, I'm not sure about that one. How was the body depicted in Mass Effect: Redemption? Was the armor intact there, or already broken? If it was intact in the comic, then it could have been the heat of rentry fused the armor and the flesh together, so the armor had to be cut off. But you raise a valid point.

I dunno if the comic is to be considered 100% canon. I wouldn't be surprised if it showed Shepard with a N7 chest place, helmet, and shoulder pieces.

Well in that case, this is indeed an issue. If Shepard's armor was in pieces after impact, then his body should have been in a much worse condition than it was.

Definitely true.

[sbvera13]

.What would it matter if you can't get the max dps if you traget can't hurt you and you sit back and wittle it down. That the proble with ME1's system....You could take any gun and take you time with no contest.

But taking your time is boring, and innefective.  I can drop a charging krogan on insanity in ME1 before it reaches me, if I time my powers and my squads powers right.  The flaw in the system was that the enemies didn't hurt you, so there was no incentive to learn how to take them down quickly (actually, this seems to be exactly what yo usaid yourself).  The tools to take them down quickly were there, don't blame the designers because you never learned how to use them.

Modifié par sbvera13, 08 septembre 2011 - 08:31 .

[100k]

Sgt Stryker wrote...
In LotSB, you get a glimpse of the state of Shepard's old armor. It did have several fractures, but not what I would call "in pieces." Curiously enough, it also was not scorched or burned....

Link?

[sbvera13]

100k wrote...

Sgt Stryker wrote...
In LotSB, you get a glimpse of the state of Shepard's old armor. It did have several fractures, but not what I would call "in pieces." Curiously enough, it also was not scorched or burned....

Link?

It was in Liara's apartment.

[Someone With Mass]

100k wrote...

I dunno if the comic is to be considered 100% canon. I wouldn't be surprised if it showed Shepard with a N7 chest place, helmet, and shoulder pieces.

His/her body was never shown directly in the comic. At the most, it was a shadowy figure inside a pod.

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

sbvera13 wrote...

The ammo system as designed didn't encourage resource management anyway, since there's effectively only 1 resource there's no management.

So making sure you don't run out of bullets by aim correctly and not waste shots is it not resourse Management?

You aim to hit the target.  You hit the target to kill it.  You kill the target to survive and win. 

I don't need same-old-ammo-system to make me not want to waste 90% of my shots on spraying and praying. 

But with the old system you can take the strongest gun and the weakest bullet and take out gods...on insanity. If you missed in ME1 you never tried tobe more careful unless you had powerful ammo thatover heat you guns but you can do the same damage with weaker amm, so ithad no real point.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Sure they can, but they cannot just invent things up out of supposition and state is as objective fact.

But calling everything a retroactive continuity simply based on the lack of knowledge is alright?

If the Codex explicitly mentions that it is A, and the narative ends up doing B, it isn't a Retcon?

No. It's only a retcon if B contradicts A. In the Codex, kinetic barriers are said to perform function A (stopping fast-moving small objects). In gameplay and cutscenes, we see mass effect fields that can perform functions A (stop bullets) and B (hold in atmosphere). This is not a retcon. Cutscenes, gameplay, and codex are all parts of the whole narrative. In fact, the Codex supplements the main narrative, not the other way around.

Going back to my Sovereign example: The Codex states that Sovereign is A) a massive dreadnought, Saren's flagship, and C) the most technologically advanced ship in the galaxy. In the actual story, we discover these 3 facts as well, but we also discover that Sovereign is D) a Reaper. Does this mean that if the Codex says A, B, and C about Sovereign, and the game itself says that Sovereign is A, B, C, and D, then this is a retcon as well?

Absolutely not.

Indeed.  Additionally, not every contradiction is a retcon.  A retcon is an attempt to explain away a contradiction by changing what has already happened or been shown.

[100k]

sbvera13 wrote...

100k wrote...

Sgt Stryker wrote...
In LotSB, you get a glimpse of the state of Shepard's old armor. It did have several fractures, but not what I would call "in pieces." Curiously enough, it also was not scorched or burned....

Link?

It was in Liara's apartment.

Oh, right. That's the back of his suit. So, it looks like we can reason that he hit the ground chest first, that his armor + helmet split open (seems reasonable to me). We also know that the surface of Alchera is snowy, so it's possible that he landed in a millenia old and deep mound of snow (along with the SR1), thus cushioning his fall enough to keep his body intact.

*by mound of snow, I mean at least 7 feet deep*

[dreman9999]

sbvera13 wrote...

.What would it matter if you can't get the max dps if you traget can't hurt you and you sit back and wittle it down. That the proble with ME1's system....You could take any gun and take you time with no contest.

But taking your time is boring, and innefective.  I can drop a charging krogan on insanity in ME1 before it reaches me, if I time my powers and my squads powers right.  The flaw in the system was that the enemies didn't hurt you, so there was no incentive to learn how to take them down quickly (actually, this seems to be exactly what yo usaid yourself).  The tools to take them down quickly were there, don't blame the designers because you never learned how to use them.

So what? the fact remins you can get by with no challage with weaker ammo and the ammo system in play were no match with the armor and power system in ME1. No one on the higher levels ever fear krogan.

[Someone With Mass]

sbvera13 wrote...

I don't see how that applies... you'll have to explain more.

It's just something you have to accept when playing Infiltrator or Vanguard. Having limited ammo to your main weapon.

Otherwise, the game would be hilariously broken if the Infiltrator could endlessly shoot enemies with the Widow all the time with little to no challenge.

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

sbvera13 wrote...

The ammo system as designed didn't encourage resource management anyway, since there's effectively only 1 resource there's no management.

So making sure you don't run out of bullets by aim correctly and not waste shots is it not resourse Management?

You aim to hit the target.  You hit the target to kill it.  You kill the target to survive and win. 

I don't need same-old-ammo-system to make me not want to waste 90% of my shots on spraying and praying. 

But with the old system you can take the strongest gun and the weakest bullet and take out gods...on insanity. If you missed in ME1 you never tried tobe more careful unless you had powerful ammo thatover heat you guns but you can do the same damage with weaker amm, so ithad no real point.

Is that how you played ME1? 

Interesting. 

I took the most effective ammo and managed the heat buildup by firing carefully, occasionally switching weapons, and always having somewhere to duck for a moment if I needed to. 

[sbvera13]

dreman9999 wrote...
But with the old system you can take the strongest gun and the weakest bullet and take out gods...on insanity. If you missed in ME1 you never tried tobe more careful unless you had powerful ammo thatover heat you guns but you can do the same damage with weaker amm, so ithad no real point.

CAN.  Not necessarily SHOULD.  As I've described, it was the worst available option.  You have only yourself to blame if that's the option you chose to use.  The flaw i nthe game design was in the combat pacing, mostly the enemies damage.  The weapons themselves were decently balanced.  Because you could live forever thoguh, there was no pressure to learn how to use them properly.

I challenge you to take down a charging Krogan on insanity with a sniper rifle in under 10 seconds.  It is possible, I do it regularly.  Hint: it involves at least 4 powers, proper squad placement, proper squad gearing, and proper squad power usage.  If you didn't go to the effort of learning how to do those things, then don't blame the game design for not including something that was actually there but you were too lazy to learn about.

Modifié par sbvera13, 08 septembre 2011 - 08:38 .

[Someone With Mass]

I actually found it boring that I could drop anything with little to no resistance with the exception of Colossus and one-hit-kill weapons in ME1 even on Insanity if I had the right setup.

[sbvera13]

I should clarify: take down a krogan with weapons fire. Since with proper power usage, you could take one "out" in roughly 1.5 seconds (lift then throw into orbit). But that's the lazy way.