344 réponses à ce sujet

[meiwow2]

Carfax wrote...

meiwow2 wrote...

People seem to forget/get confused. It's an rpg, not an action game.

If your teamates die in an RPG it's your fault.
If your teamates die in an action game it's the ai's fault.

See how that works?

Come on, let's say it all out loud!       R P G
Get it through your think skulls, it's not a fully blown action game damn it!

Have you been hiding under a rock the last few years?  How many times has some Bioware rep publically stated that Mass Effect is an ACTION RPG?

Action rpg doesn't mean it's supposed to play or behave JUST like an action game right? NO, NO it doesn't.

[LeVaughnX]

meiwow2 wrote...

People seem to forget/get confused. It's an rpg, not an action game.

If your teamates die in an RPG it's your fault.
If your teamates die in an action game it's the ai's fault.

See how that works?

I don't think you understand something. When you play ANY GAME that has "BROKEN GAMEPLAY" or "FLAWED GAMEPLAY" then you will fail at the gameplay in at least ONE WAY. The reason for this is simple; the gameplay is flawed!

Let me put it another way....If you COMMAND your A.I. to DO SOMETHING and they "refuse" / "ignore" or simply "do nothing", it is in no way your fault or responsability to babysit them and accept it as your fault when they die. In a tactical game like this its NECESSARY that the A.I. you command can follow orders 100% or they are doomed to fail and die.

You cannot command that which does not listen.

[SNascimento]

ME2's AI was ok.

[Giantdeathrobot]

''Yeah Garrus really knew how to "chew the dirt"....''

Then you failed at using him properly. My Garrus overloaded shields, Concussive Shot barriers ot foes about to strike hard to me, headhot enemies, severely weaken that forsaken Harbinger drone and was generally a welcome asset on anything but Husk missions (why would you take a sniper against Husks I have no idea however).

If you ask why he didn't solo the whole game by himself, same reason why my super-elite, hundred-years-of-training Space Marines in Dawn of War 2 don't get to cover or target one specific enemy on their own; I'm the player and it's my job to make them do so. I would not want Garrus to automatically waste an Overload on a distant Blue Sun merc while a dog Mech is close to me and keeps knocking me back. Because that's what automated AI does, it follows a routine, it's not intelligent, and it's prone to failures, no matter how much marketing crap goes into making you believe that THEIR routines have developped self-awareness or something. Hence, the more control I have over my squad, the better.

[LeVaughnX]

Alright listen; I know how tactical games work, I'm very much INTO tactical games. I know exactly how to play Mass Effect 1 and 2 - I love the games and the books and I can't get enough of them. I understand how to use the characters and in which position and where and blah blah friggen blah.

Get it through your thick ass skulls. If you tell someone to do something and they DON'T yet they won't do anything on their own, that is a problem that needs solved! If I keep (Example) Garrus and Tali in the back and litterly (as an Infiltrator [sp?]) "tank" for them, they still end up charging in and dieing OR they just do nothing! I'll see them (in a broken way) crouch behind cover, then use their powers on the piece of cover instead of actually helping me. When I'm done commanding them I simply have to kill each enemy at my own leasure while my useless A.I. refuses to listen to me.

You "CANNOT" command something that does not respond / does not listen. In Gears 3 you didn't have to command them because YOU WERE A TEAM - they watched your back and you watched theirs!

Now then..If the "ENEMY" A.I. will be "beefed up" in ME3 why can't the Ally A.I.?

[DTKT]

slimgrin wrote...

DTKT wrote...

Both ME1 and ME2 had terrible AI. I don't think anything is going to change in ME3.

AI in ME2 is meant to be minimal. You're supposed to control your team's special attacks yourself, and that's all the AI you should need.

I don't really want to have to micro-manage my squadmembers. If we can have an option to micro-manage or to "boost" their own AI, It would be fine by me.

[slimgrin]

I can promise you guys AI in ME3 will still be 'dumb' compared to your standard action title, but only because you the player are meant to take the helm and issue commands for your whole team, moment to moment. The more a person did that in ME2, the easier it was.

[meiwow2]

I understand if people have issues with the ai not responding at times like LeVaughnX said but I'm willing to bet that the reason why all the people who stated that they play mass effect 2 alone the entire way because their teamates die it's not faulty game mechanics, it's just them not playing the game right. You can't blame you teamate's death 100% of the time to the game's ai.

[gammameggon]

Gears of War SUCKS!!!! PEW, PEW, PEW, PEW, PEW!!!!!

Oh wait....this is indeed what ME has become. Boring!!!!!!!

[LeVaughnX]

meiwow2 wrote...

I understand if people have issues with the ai not responding at times like LeVaughnX said but I'm willing to bet that the reason why all the people who stated that they play mass effect 2 alone the entire way because their teamates die it's not faulty game mechanics, it's just them not playing the game right. You can't blame you teamate's death 100% of the time to the game's ai.

Why not? If you honestly know how to play the game and you honestly understand tactics and you honestly watch as your team that you commanded randomly ignores your commands or just does something completely stupid that you KNOW is a "glitch" or "bad programming" - why can you not blame the A.I. and Design?

[gammameggon]

I'm playing Fallout 3 right now. What an AWESOME game. Bethesda rocks!!!

[didymos1120]

meiwow2 wrote...

Action rpg doesn't mean it's supposed to play or behave JUST like an action game right? NO, NO it doesn't.

As far as combat goes?  Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what it means.

[AtreiyaN7]

meiwow2 wrote...

Ferris95 wrote...

meiwow2 wrote...

Warden130 wrote...

meiwow2 wrote...

Do not put Gears of War 3 and Mass Effect 3 in the same sentence please.... err wait. Damn, look what you made me do...

Did you even read past the first sentence? He makes a very valid point. The squad AI (and enemy) in Gears 3 was brilliant, almost perfect. I also think Bioware could learn this.

So what? ME3 is not a fully blown action game. ME has it where it counts.

It's an action RPG, it has no excuse not to have decent working squad AI.

So you want the ai in a halfbreed rpg game as huge as mass effect to be absolutely perfect like in gears of war (assuming it's perfect for gow) where all the have to worry about is the action?
That's my point, it's not gonna happen.. how's that realistic?
Besides most of us don't play mass effect because we care about how life like or perfect the ai of our partners is. Is good enough.
People are selfish as hell, don't compare gow with ME period.

There's nothing wrong with wanting the action part of the equation in an action RPG to be done well. I don't even play the GoW games; still, there's also nothing wrong with bringing that series up as an example of good squad AI. It's something that was lacking in ME2, and if the BW devs improve the AI in ME3, then that's a good thing - regardless of where they took their cues from (that's assuming that they have managed to improve things).

I find it hilarious that you're complaing about people being selfish when you yourself are rather selfishly insisting that other people can't mention GoW and ME in the same sentence due to what seems to be a rather irrational prejudice against GoW.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 25 septembre 2011 - 05:06 .

[patocerda]

Yeah, so some of the guys on the first page talk like BioWare isn't doing sh*t about AI and are fine/happy with what was already on ME2.

The devs have given me the impression they are working really hard on every aspect of ME3 to make a great conclusion to the trilogy. I'd personally not worry about it, honestly.

[slimgrin]

Well, the OP is saying Gears of War does characterization better..so, I guess I'm outta here. Can't really take that statement seriously.

[LeVaughnX]

slimgrin wrote...

Well, the OP is saying Gears of War does characterization better..so, I guess I'm outta here. Can't really take that statement seriously.

OP here - I'm saying two things now.

1.) Most of you Gears of War haters are just retarded Call of Duty fans who probably jumped on the Mass Effect train after seeing how awesome the game was.

2.) Gears of War had evolved from poor A.I. to Excellent A.I. in the finale. Every installment the A.I. and story telling got better; and when Gears 3 hit - they were perfect. A little TOO much action but at the same time they told a lot of the story by just "Talking" which fu*king works for me!

But no - my original complaint, statement and suggestion was this...

""Gears of War 3 has excellent A.I. that responds to a team-based intelligence that cannot be directed but DOESN'T NEED TO BE. Why can't the Squad A.I. in Mass Effect 3 be upgraded so they can work together finally instead of being handicapped children that require Shepards direct attention in order for them to survive.""

I love Mass Effect, I love the fact you can use Squad Powers mixed with your own to change the battlefield, but I do not like how the A.I. responds ****** poorly in Mass Effect 2. Sure in the first game the A.I. was down right useless (except for power-useage) but they at least didn't die every five seconds (when you got them to level 60 anyway...). Where as in ME2 they showed off Jack being some super-badass biotic and all you got is someone who dies because when you put her in cover + target a Collector with Shockwave all she does is crouch behind a brick instead of engaging in the cover while screaming ""I CAN'T DO THAT"" like a retarded basta*d child lost at a zoo.


[Edit] - If you waved your hands in the air going ""DURHH I CAN'T DO THAT"" don't worry I did it too when I read my own statement...

Modifié par LeVaughnX, 25 septembre 2011 - 05:13 .

[meiwow2]

@AtreiyaN7 Basically what I'm saying is not that you shouldn't expect the ME team to do a better job on the ai of ME3 but simply that you cannot compare ME3 with GOW3 because the teams behind their developments are in completely different shooes. The ME teams has a lot more on their plate than the gow3 team with their more simple game. That's all I'm saying.

[javierabegazo]

LeVaughnX wrote...
-snip-

.

If I may, I'd like to explain what you're saying in a simpler way, because I feel people are misinterpretating you on their bias against "Teh dum shooter$"


The OP isn't saying that the Squad AI should play itself, but rather that they should react to what's happening in the environment more intuitively, and at the very least, if you tell them to stay put, to frakkin' stay put, and stay in cover.


I personally don't like gears of war because it feels like I'm on rails all the time, the fact that i have no control whatsoever over any of my squad. but, at the same time, if I tell Garrus to move over there, he should move over there, with haste, and more importantly, stay over there

[LeVaughnX]

javierabegazo wrote...

LeVaughnX wrote...
-snip-

.

If I may, I'd like to explain what you're saying in a simpler way, because I feel people are misinterpretating you on their bias against "Teh dum shooter$"


The OP isn't saying that the Squad AI should play itself, but rather that they should react to what's happening in the environment more intuitively, and at the very least, if you tell them to stay put, to frakkin' stay put, and stay in cover.


I personally don't like gears of war because it feels like I'm on rails all the time, the fact that i have no control whatsoever over any of my squad. but, at the same time, if I tell Garrus to move over there, he should move over there, with haste, and more importantly, stay over there

Sort of right buddy but let me try and clear this up (I'm sorry if I'm getting rude and sh*t but I'm getting really annoyed at the random rage here).

I was talking to my father earlier about how "Squad A.I." should work and how it shouldn't work.

It should:
- Be Supportive
- Listen When Commanded
- Understand Combat and Tactics
- Be Able to Respond to "Flanking" or "Enemy Engagements"
- Follow Your "Lead"

It shouldn't:
- Win the Game for You
- Ignore Your Commands and do what it Pleases
- Endanger Itself by Listening to a Command that Would Harm Them or Yourself


I want fluid A.I. that can enter cover smoothly like Shepard can, that can engage the enemy on their own without spamming powers randomly (like they do), that can pick and choose how to react to what kind of enemy (fall back, charge, shield breaker, biotic sapper etc), and most importantly always have a "Team Mentality". I liked Dragon Age Origins for this fact; I could program my Team to listen and they would! If I was low on health they would heal me, if I needed someone to "Tank" they would, if I wanted someone to "Run away and let so and so tank" they would! 

Mind you Dragon Age 2 the tactics for me didn't do sh*t (They never listened >_>...) but I'd expect some level of "control" and "intelligence" from my "A.I." partners. Is that so hard? Is that really so bad?