344 réponses à ce sujet

[meiwow2]

jreezy wrote...

meiwow2 wrote...
Lol.. don't be an extremist. I don't disagree that they should improve the ai but at the same time I say we shouldn't expect gow quality ai on an rpg/action hybrid game.

Why not?

Like I said before, I think they have a bigger more complex task to achive already.
It's the diference between focusing on doing 1 thing good and focusing on doing 3 things good. Who do you think is going to polish their job more? the person multitasking 3 things or the one doing 1 thing? Having said that I do agree there's room for improvement in me3, ofcourse but don't expect a 3 job multitask to be as perfect as a 1 job task sort of speak lol.
Don't take the "example" in litteral terms.

Modifié par meiwow2, 25 septembre 2011 - 06:48 .

[didymos1120]

Genshie wrote...

The ME games have more than just run and gun gameplay in it. Simple. The developers are doing and focusing on way more than just the action portion of the game compared to the developers of GoW3. In GoW you never had to make a choice that could change the portion of a story of the game.

Um, you realize the guys who work on the combat are their own little sub-team, right?  The fact that there's branching dialogue and plots doesn't really affect them beyond the fact that so-and-so might not be available for combat in some level or another.

[meiwow2]

didymos1120 wrote...

Genshie wrote...

The ME games have more than just run and gun gameplay in it. Simple. The developers are doing and focusing on way more than just the action portion of the game compared to the developers of GoW3. In GoW you never had to make a choice that could change the portion of a story of the game.

Um, you realize the guys who work on the combat are their own little sub-team, right?  The fact that there's branching dialogue and plots doesn't really affect them beyond the fact that so-and-so might not be available for combat in some level or another.

Yeah but maybe they have a lot less guys working on the "action" compared to a gow team, you don't know.

[Genshie]

didymos1120 wrote...

Genshie wrote...

The ME games have more than just run and gun gameplay in it. Simple. The developers are doing and focusing on way more than just the action portion of the game compared to the developers of GoW3. In GoW you never had to make a choice that could change the portion of a story of the game.

Um, you realize the guys who work on the combat are their own little sub-team, right?  The fact that there's branching dialogue and plots doesn't really affect them beyond the fact that so-and-so might not be available for combat in some level or another.

And you forget that ME was never meant to be a Pure action game and that ALL the teams had to work together, right? And it does matter who is there since the dialogue would be vary depending on who was there and what would happen in said area if you took said squadie with.

[kidbd15]

jreezy wrote...

meiwow2 wrote...
Lol.. don't be an extremist. I don't disagree that they should improve the ai but at the same time I say we shouldn't expect gow quality ai on an rpg/action hybrid game.

Why not?

Agreed... why not? If BioWare aims to be the best in the business, then they need to spend the resources in making EVERY ASPECT of their game the best in the business, not just the RPG and story elements. And the shooting and squad/enemy AI is a HUGE part of this Mass Effect series, that is a fact.

Some people play it just for the rpg and story, but others, play if for the action as well.  I enjoy the RPG and the story elements of ME, it's what initially brought me into the series, but I also enjoy the action sequences. In that regard, I would like to have tougher enemies to force me to play better tactically, and I would like my squad to better respond to not only my commands, but also the environment (things OP posted, such as actually taking cover and not just crouching behind cover, and just overall being much smarter).  

Now, I haven't played GoW3, but if they have these aspects of their game nailed down, then BioWare should take note.  And just because it's an Action-RPG is no excuse for their squad/enemy AI to be poor. EVERY aspect of their game needs to be top notch. That's what they claim to strive for, and that is what they should deliver. If they need more time, delay the game.

[rapscallioness]

Hmmm, well, I only read the first page. I will go back and read the rest.

I will say this OP, I've never played GoW, however, you make it sound interesting. I may have to give it a try.

I'm pretty sure the ME franchise is checking out things that GoW did right. Both franchises seem to have great respect for each other. Perhaps it's some kinda game dev club because they're the only ones that truly understand how tough it is to make a great game considering all that must go into it.

As far as the squad, I gotta say, I didn't have that particular problem in the ME games. My squad saved me more times than I can count. A sudden Krogan charge; or a shockwave/concussive shot; overload. There were times when I thought it was a mission failure looming, then Bam!, here comes my squad.

There was the occasional Kamikaze run by one of them into a wall of doom..lol. But over all my squad was really supportive.

Like I said, I haven't played GoW 3, so I can't make that comparison.

I have a love/hate relationship with the running outta ammo thing. On the one hand I love it because it makes me hustle. Get outta cover. Get some more ammo. Figure out how best to use another weapon in the situation. Use my powers while I get some more ammo.

On the other hand, damn! I'm outta ammo.

But really, yay for GoW. I'm always happy to see devs. raising the bar. Because other devs pick up on what works, and take lessons from what failed. In the end, I'm the winner. More quality games all around.

And ME has stated that they've improved the intelligence of the AI in the game. For both enemies and squad. So, I'm excited to see what they've done. Yes, I love story. That's the most important part for me...But! it's gotta have good Action, too. And ME has some good action. Had me dropping bricks anyway.

It's the part about how ME needs to "Take a Lesson" that just comes off as condescending. They're not children, and they make pretty damn good games.

Intelligent AI is important to ME devs. That's why they've highlighted the fact that they've improved it. Good on them. And good on GoW. It sounds like a gamers paradise...Ha!

[Terror_K]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

But my point was that some of us actually enjoy the shooter elements.  I'm a huuuuge fan of the story and characters, but I've become the kind of gal who cranks the difficulty up to insanity and raises hell with flashbangs and headshots.

You seem to be operating under the impression that ME3 isn't allowed to embrace its shooter side because that would somehow dumb it down.  I disagree; you can still have a sweeping epic with a lovable cast and mountains and mountains of immersion and customization and whatnot ALONG WITH seriously awesome gunplay.

Honestly.  I can like guns and still be smart and sensitive.  Promise.

Mass Effect has yet to demonstrate that though. Sure, it theoretically can embrace its shooter side without being dumbed down, but that certainly wasn't the case with ME2. At all. It's hard to tell with ME3 thus far, even with modding coming back. It still looks far too focused on action and combat that seems more pure TPS rather than properly adapted to the RPG nature of it. And despite claims of "big big levels" and the fact that things do admittedly look a bit more epic in scale, the levels themselves that we have seen still look rather linear in design (they just look linear, but bigger).

A lot of it also isn't a problem of the TPS combat, but the overall way the game is presented. ME2, for instance, felt like it was babying me and treating me like I hadn't played an RPG before... like a constant demeaning tutorial from start to end. The whole thing felt too concerned with keeping anything complex away, doing things for me and not letting me really play and throwing up big pretty pictures and giant, simple writing to make sure that I would understand it all, just in case I was five years old or something. Not to mention the more over-the-top, less mature, more bombastic approach and style the game had. For a game that was intended to be "more immersive" by the developers, it sure seemed to want to slam the fact it was a game in my face at every turn to pull me out of an chance of losing myself in the narrative.

[rapscallioness]

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

If you think tha's ridiculous just think about Reecees. Just how does it prfectly blend peanut butter and chocolate to make such an amazing snack? Gosh I am just baffled thinking about it........

*chuckles* oh, you.

[Kasai666]

Wow. I just read from my last post to Dunstan's post. I repeat, wow.

[Zakatak757]

ME2 squad AI is sketchy, not going to lie. Squad mechanics in general, actually. I choose my squadmates based on powers, never weapons, because they seem to do less damage and are used inefficiently.

Besides the retarded Incisor + Incisor combo where Garrus/Zaeed/Legion/Thane can practically play the game by themselves.

[AdmiralCheez]

@Terror_K: And a lot of people were frustrated with that. But see, when we goof up, we learn from it.

[blitzkkrieg]

OP, I have a question; were you playing alone or with other people?  Because my brother and I have been playing through the campaign, and we agree that the AI (at least for co-op, might differ with single player) is horrendous.  It will ignore us being downed (or worse, walk over to us but then let us die while right next to them), crawl away from us when we try to revive them (worst case of this was during the lambent beserker battle; they would crawl into the fire), and also is overall ineffective, allowing enemies with shotguns to walk right past them then point blank us without even seeing them.

But back on topic, I would also like to see improved AI.  You're point about squad AI in ME2 is spot on, but I am hopeful that they will improve it.

[Terror_K]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

@Terror_K: And a lot of people were frustrated with that. But see, when we goof up, we learn from it.

Yes, but have they learned? For instance, it's pretty damn clear that BioWare haven't learned from the mistakes DA2 made given comments I've read from devs on that side of things. It's a bit more sketchy with ME3, but for every case where they do seem to have learned, there's another case where it seems they haven't. Not to mention that there are mistakes that were made that simply shouldn't have ever been made in the first place.

Overall I think BioWare's major problem is this whole "have our cake and eat it too" mentality and approach, and that's something I just feel they haven't learned from at all, even if certain aspects of ME3 are admittedly looking better than ME2.

Modifié par Terror_K, 25 septembre 2011 - 07:21 .

[AdmiralCheez]

Terror_K wrote...

Yes, but have they learned? For instance, it's pretty damn clear that BioWare haven't learned from the mistakes DA2 made given comments I've read from devs on that side of things. It's a bit more sketchy with ME3, but for every case where they do seem to have learned, there's another case where it seems they haven't. Not to mention that there are mistakes that were made that simply shouldn't have ever been made in the first place.

As is the case with anything.  Thankfully, there was less horrible PR over ME2 (and therefore less damage control), plus Casey Hudson seems to be slightly less psychotic than Mike Laidlaw.

[AdmiralCheez]

Terror_K wrote...

Overall I think BioWare's major problem is this whole "have our cake and eat it too" mentality and approach, and that's something I just feel they haven't learned from at all, even if certain aspects of ME3 are admittedly looking better than ME2.

Yes, but imagine if they actually pull it off.

Heavy risk, but the priiiiiiiize.

[Confused-Shepard]

I think the problem is that Mass Effect is the Jack of all Trades but Master of None
All of the individual elements are done better in other games but Mass Effect combines those elemets to great effect

Another problem is the sheer number of RPG elitists in the forums who think any game that does not invole several excel sheets worth of stats and loads of meaningless choices is a terrible game that should be burned

I love both Gears & Mass Effect and Bioware could seiously learn how Atmosphere & Gunplay should be done
Also, dump the emotionless husk that is Jacob Taylor for the always fun and lovable Augustus Cole AKA Cole Train
Seriously, he's a lot more likeable in Gears 3, fights with an infectious positive attitude but also gets some sad mpments. Hell his loyalty mission would involve how he is unable to let go of his past, his happy & glorious past

Modifié par Confused-Shepard, 25 septembre 2011 - 07:36 .

[Rolling Flame]

Its not just the squad AI that needs an overhaul, the enemies are in need of one too. Even on Insanity, I didn't find them to be aggressive enough; once they got into cover, they would more than content to stay in that one spot and blast away, making them fairly easy and predictable targets. The other end of the spectrum wasn't much better; shotgun-wielding enemies would charge without any thought of self-preservation, ignoring cover that would benefit them greatly. Then there were the enemies who would get up in your face, and get smashed because they didn't know how to whack Shepard back.

For ME3, I want enemies to suppress and flank, to put a lot of pressure on the team, and move in, whether that be at close quarters, as it looks as if most bad guys will have a melee attack, or to find flanks that leave us having to readjust and reevaluate.

[gammameggon]

AI improvement??? How about NPC improvement, with cycles based on a 24 hour clock, where they don't just stand around but actually have tasks and move about.

Yeah...let's go there.

Never thought I'd see the day a BioWare game was compared so vigorously to freaking Gears of freaking War. Wtf???????????? We need to tone down these shooting and combat fantasies and shift focus back to exploration. ASAP.

[AdmiralCheez]

gammameggon wrote...

Never thought I'd see the day a BioWare game was compared so vigorously to freaking Gears of freaking War.

Any and all third-person sci-fi shooters can and will inevitably be compared to Gears of War.

Even if they're only half-shooter.

[AtreiyaN7]

gammameggon wrote...

AI improvement??? How about NPC improvement, with cycles based on a 24 hour clock, where they don't just stand around but actually have tasks and move about.

Yeah...let's go there.

Never thought I'd see the day a BioWare game was compared so vigorously to freaking Gears of freaking War. Wtf???????????? We need to tone down these shooting and combat fantasies and shift focus back to exploration. ASAP.

Oh boy, that's what I really want in my games - companions with the mental capacity of baboons when it comes to combat and a nifty day-night cycle to compensate for their lack of utilityl

[Confused-Shepard]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

gammameggon wrote...

Never thought I'd see the day a BioWare game was compared so vigorously to freaking Gears of freaking War.

Any and all third-person sci-fi shooters can and will inevitably be compared to Gears of War.

Even if they're only half-shooter.

Considering Gears has perfect third person gunplay to an art form and invented the cover system. Yes there will be many many comparisons. And stop treating Gears like a dirty word and accept the fact that it's a great game and Mass Effect can learn a lot. Developers aren't as elitist and blind as you people. 

Conversely, churning out games every year with little to no changes like Call Of Duty is nothing to be proud of. 
Once again, Mass Effect 2 lacked a certain sense of SCALE!!! I hope Mass Efffect 3 rectifies this.
Also, you wan't exploration? Have DICE teach Bioware how vehicles work. 

If we turn this around, I would also suggest a Gears 4 to take some cues from Mass Effect and have  city hubs with squadmate conversations system.

[Rolling Flame]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

gammameggon wrote...

Never thought I'd see the day a BioWare game was compared so vigorously to freaking Gears of freaking War.

Any and all third-person sci-fi shooters can and will inevitably be compared to Gears of War.

Even if they're only half-shooter.

Considering Gears has perfect third person gunplay to an art form and invented the cover system. Yes there will be many many comparisons. And stop treating Gears like a dirty word and accept the fact that it's a great game and Mass Effect can learn a lot. Developers aren't as elitist and blind as you people. 

Conversely, churning out games every year with little to no changes like Call Of Duty is nothing to be proud of. 
Once again, Mass Effect 2 lacked a certain sense of SCALE!!! I hope Mass Efffect 3 rectifies this.
Also, you wan't exploration? Have DICE teach Bioware how vehicles work. 

If we turn this around, I would also suggest a Gears 4 to take some cues from Mass Effect and have  city hubs with squadmate conversations system.

This. Mass Effect and Gears are both third person shooters, so it is inevitable that they are going to be compared in some capacity. It's similar to how FPS's are all lumped against Call of Duty, even if they happen to play completely differently.

On a different note, I'm not sure I want vehicles in Mass Effect 3; what we've gotten so far hasn't been overly fun, in my opinion. However, if vehicles are in, then BioWare should borrow a few thing from Halo, which, from the very beginning, has always done vehicle combat extremely well.