139 réponses à ce sujet

[The Spamming Troll]

Gabriel Stelinski wrote...

Preston Watamaniuk wrote...

Any class can carry any weapon.[...]Every class can carry 5 weapons, BUT there is a really big penalty to doing so if you are playing anything but a Soldier. Generally in my Adept runs I like to take a Tempest and a Carnifex.[...]

So I could finally have that definitive experience of carrying only an assault rifle and a pistol? Oh, HELL YEAH!

i totally agree with this.

[Terror_K]

JeffZero wrote...

With all due respect Terror, how often do you say much of anything particularly nice about anything in ME2 and now ME3? I can see where you're coming from but you might want to step back, read some of these responses and re-evaluate your stance.

/shrug If you still feel that way afterward, fair enough. It just seems like nothing the developers can do in any game not called ME1 satisfies you... pretty much ever.

While how well it works, IMO, will depend on exactly what these penalties are and how strong they are, to me this is the equivalent of in Dragon Age a mage and a rogue being able to wield a two-handed sword with as much ability as a fighter, etc. Every class being able to use every weapon isn't really an issue for me, but every class being able to carry and use all different types as effectively as a Soldier does.  I actually liked the original change to ME3 where it was stated every class could use every weapon, but only a Soldier could carry four types at once, while others were limited. Still, even then I got the feeling that it would result in a whole bunch of people creating Adepts and Engineers using Assault Rifles like the Mattock, while not having access to the AR by default was a good restriction that forced you to rely on your powers more and actually use them. Perhaps ironically, this is coming from somebody who lambasted weapon mods becoming powers because I felt the restriction in that case didn't make any sense, especially given it not existing in the original game.

The reason I don't often compliment ME2 and much of ME3 is because a lot of the changes seem targeted at the same audience that I'm not part of and are changes related to recent trends I generally dislike in gaming recently, including the general watering down, simplification and over-accessibility of games to suit a broader audience more used to playing the likes of CoD, Gears and Halo. The basic mentality of those creating the game and the direction they seem to want to take it in is simply one I don't agree with, where simpler always equals better, things are overly automated because too many gamers today are immediately put off by anything complex or even remotely fiddly that deviates away from the core gameplay for any more than a few seconds, and things being watered down and made so basic that too much freedom is given where restrictions should be placed just so players aren't put off by not being able to have everything in one playthrough. This is the same mentality and style that's resulted in things such as classes disappearing entirely and allowing players to just create a character with no restrictions and limitations in some recent games.

Simply put: ME3 still seems far more aimed at today's mainstream crowd and incorporates too many "modern" gameplay factors and trends I simply don't like. ME1 was far from perfect, but it was presented, designed and styled in a manner that felt more in-line with proper RPG design, even if it wasn't a pure hardcore RPG. ME2 felt too much like it was designed as a modern action game in every respect with the RPG stuff no longer core and just slapped on to merely exist. ME3 admittedly seems stronger in the RPG aspects, but still feels like they've been haphazardly stapled to an action TPS game made for the CoD audience. More customisation has returned, but I see little real meat, and there's still a pervading sense of simplicity to it. I could be wrong, but that's the feeling I'm getting so far.

[JeffZero]

@Terror:

Thank you for the insight. I truly didn't mean to offend and I'm glad the sometimes-murky nature of internet tone didn't lead you to believe otherwise.

I respect your thoughts here and I have definitely seen things with other favorite series of mine that resonate strongly with your complaints. ME2, well, it can't be denied that some things were changed for the reasons you brought up. I don't consider myself part of that crowd they're gunning for either -- pun intended -- but I wound up walking away from ME2 just as satisfied as I was with the first game. It's unfortunate that you clearly did not but I have a deeper understanding of why now and I hope for the best for you in ME3.

[longlun]

CptBomBom00 wrote...

Mattock needs bigger magazine, Also i would actually like to see OmniShield for Soldier as an upgarde to OminTool.

OmniShield + SMG.

Modifié par longlun, 24 octobre 2011 - 04:23 .

[DiebytheSword]

JeffZero wrote...

@Terror:

Thank you for the insight. I truly didn't mean to offend and I'm glad the sometimes-murky nature of internet tone didn't lead you to believe otherwise.

I respect your thoughts here and I have definitely seen things with other favorite series of mine that resonate strongly with your complaints. ME2, well, it can't be denied that some things were changed for the reasons you brought up. I don't consider myself part of that crowd they're gunning for either -- pun intended -- but I wound up walking away from ME2 just as satisfied as I was with the first game. It's unfortunate that you clearly did not but I have a deeper understanding of why now and I hope for the best for you in ME3.

I feel the same about ME2, I've played both games multiple times and I have to say while each game has its faults, I found something to love in each of them.  Not like.  Love.  Best non-waste of money in a long time.

[JeffZero]

Heh, my thoughts exactly.

[Janus Prospero]

Terror_K wrote...

The reason I don't often compliment ME2 and much of ME3 is because a lot of the changes seem targeted at the same audience that I'm not part of and are changes related to recent trends I generally dislike in gaming recently, including the general watering down, simplification and over-accessibility of games to suit a broader audience more used to playing the likes of CoD, Gears and Halo. The basic mentality of those creating the game and the direction they seem to want to take it in is simply one I don't agree with, where simpler always equals better, things are overly automated because too many gamers today are immediately put off by anything complex or even remotely fiddly that deviates away from the core gameplay for any more than a few seconds, and things being watered down and made so basic that too much freedom is given where restrictions should be placed just so players aren't put off by not being able to have everything in one playthrough. This is the same mentality and style that's resulted in things such as classes disappearing entirely and allowing players to just create a character with no restrictions and limitations in some recent games.

Simply put: ME3 still seems far more aimed at today's mainstream crowd and incorporates too many "modern" gameplay factors and trends I simply don't like. ME1 was far from perfect, but it was presented, designed and styled in a manner that felt more in-line with proper RPG design, even if it wasn't a pure hardcore RPG. ME2 felt too much like it was designed as a modern action game in every respect with the RPG stuff no longer core and just slapped on to merely exist. ME3 admittedly seems stronger in the RPG aspects, but still feels like they've been haphazardly stapled to an action TPS game made for the CoD audience. More customisation has returned, but I see little real meat, and there's still a pervading sense of simplicity to it. I could be wrong, but that's the feeling I'm getting so far.

Here's my take on this.

Mass Effect 1 gameplay was almost completely cerebral in the sense that being good at video games didn't make the game much easier for you. The combat was clunky and you sort of lobbed powers at things until they died. Your success was largely attributed to how well you geared and leveled your characters. A lot of people complain that ME2 was too streamlined and I get that, but only to an extent.

Although there were certainly more abilities per character, I don't think there was much discernible difference between say...Sabotage and Overload. And although ME1 had way more weapons and mods than ME2, there wasn't really a lot of difference between a Lancer I and an HMWA X. Furthermore, there wasn't a whole lot of distinction between the classes. Yes they all had different powers to lob, but I can't say that I played my engineer any differently than I played my solider (Use powers on cool down and keep shooting until everything is dead). I used my Pistol instead of my Assault rifle, but that's about it.

Now, Mass Effect 2 undoubtedly is a shift in the other direction. How good you are at playing the game is probably the primary deciding factor in how well you play (I realize this sounds like a tautology, but stick with me, lol).  However, I would argue that the game is much deeper than people give it credit for.

Let’s take the soldier for example. As a soldier in ME2 you have several key choices that determine how you play. They are (1) what super weapon you pick on the collector ship, (2) what evolution of Adrenaline Rush you take, and (3) what evolution of combat mastery you take. Not all choices are created equal and there are certain best builds. I’ve seen theorycrafting on this subject rival some discussions on World of Warcraft message boards.

For example, Heightened Adrenaline Rush gives a much larger damage boost than hardened, but not enough to compensate for the increased time dilation for rapid fire weapons. Since the Widow can only get off one shot in either evolution, Heightened AR is going to much more suited to it since it gives you a larger per shot damage boost. Whereas the Revenant is much more suited to Hardened AR since you’re not taking as big a hit in your damage per second capability.

A real time gameplay example would be ammo power selection. Incendiary ammo is going to be better when fighting armored Krogan and Vorcha. Disruptor ammo is going to be better when fighting shielded geth. But what about when fighting shielded mercenaries or armored mechs? Then what? Do you stick to a certain ammo type? Do you assign certain weapons certain ammo types and swap around depending on the situation?

Even simple choices like who you do or don’t take on a mission based on the powers they have and the enemies you are going to fight will drastically affect the difficulty of the mission. These kinds of choices are so much more interesting to me than anything you do in ME1.

So while your ability to play action games contributes much more to your success in ME2 than in ME1, I would argue that the people that succeed most in ME2 are the people that can both play well and make intelligent RPG/tactical choices.

Modifié par Janus Prospero, 24 octobre 2011 - 05:43 .

[DNRB]

IEatWhatIPoo wrote...

BRND wrote...

.

I take it you're from the future and have already played Mass Effect 3 to completion with all classes?

If so, please continue sharing your future wisdom with the rest of us present-folk.

Yeah I knew this would come up. I have to dissapoint you, I'm actually not from the future
No it's not clear yet what the panelty will be, but do you really, honestly, think it wil be balanced? And not only as in "what will be the strongest", because AR will without a doubt be the best offensive power again, but also as in 'does the soldier have anything unique or, is playing the adept as an adept actually viable, instead of being a one-men army?
The soldier in me3 has two unigue powers: AR and concussive shot, grenades, also, can be used by every class. The adept has throw, pull, singularity, lift orb and warp. The engineer has equally as much powers and the vanguard can charge! With bioware giving every weapon to every class( despite what they sad earlier), and throwing grenades in there to for everyone (pun intended), I just don't have much faith that they will properly balance this, gameplay- and statwise.

[CptBomBom00]

So soldier can carry up to 5 weapons not counting heavy one, but there will be set back if we carry Revenant, Widow,Claymore?

[AllianceN7Marine]

As a solider class I only use 4 of the 5 weapons (M96-Mattock, M98-Widow, M-5 Phalanx & M920-Cain), if I could ditch the shotgun and carry more ammo that would be perfect.

[lazuli]

AllianceN7Marine wrote...

As a solider class I only use 4 of the 5 weapons (M96-Mattock, M98-Widow, M-5 Phalanx & M920-Cain), if I could ditch the shotgun and carry more ammo that would be perfect.

I always thought that shotguns didn't mesh very well with Adrenaline Rush.  They fire too slowly.  I wonder if weapon modding will make me change my mind about that.

Hmm.  I just realized that the Soldier, the so-called master of all weapons, is the class that I find least effective with the shotgun.  I think I'd rank it:

1. Vanguard
2. Infiltrator
3. Sentinel
4. Adept
5. Engineer
6. Soldier

[Wulfram]

lazuli wrote...

I always thought that shotguns didn't mesh very well with Adrenaline Rush.  They fire too slowly.  I wonder if weapon modding will make me change my mind about that.

The Scimitar fires fast enough.

[ryoldschool]

lazuli wrote...

AllianceN7Marine wrote...

As a solider class I only use 4 of the 5 weapons (M96-Mattock, M98-Widow, M-5 Phalanx & M920-Cain), if I could ditch the shotgun and carry more ammo that would be perfect.

I always thought that shotguns didn't mesh very well with Adrenaline Rush.  They fire too slowly.  I wonder if weapon modding will make me change my mind about that.

Hmm.  I just realized that the Soldier, the so-called master of all weapons, is the class that I find least effective with the shotgun.  I think I'd rank it:

1. Vanguard
2. Infiltrator
3. Sentinel
4. Adept
5. Engineer
6. Soldier

No doubt Vanguard should be at the top of the list, but soldier at #6?

As you might be aware we have a thread on a Shotgun heavy soldier here


Here is a compliation Mi-Chan made of some of his play with the claymore

[CoffeeHolic93]

ryoldschool wrote...

lazuli wrote...

AllianceN7Marine wrote...

As a solider class I only use 4 of the 5 weapons (M96-Mattock, M98-Widow, M-5 Phalanx & M920-Cain), if I could ditch the shotgun and carry more ammo that would be perfect.

I always thought that shotguns didn't mesh very well with Adrenaline Rush.  They fire too slowly.  I wonder if weapon modding will make me change my mind about that.

Hmm.  I just realized that the Soldier, the so-called master of all weapons, is the class that I find least effective with the shotgun.  I think I'd rank it:

1. Vanguard
2. Infiltrator
3. Sentinel
4. Adept
5. Engineer
6. Soldier

No doubt Vanguard should be at the top of the list, but soldier at #6?

As you might be aware we have a thread on a Shotgun heavy soldier here


Here is a compliation Mi-Chan made of some of his play with the claymore

I WOULD've shamelessly plugged my video, but you did it for me.  The Shotgun Soldier is amazing.

[GipsyDangeresque]

Well, just because shotguns are great with Soldiers doesn't mean it can't be the worst compared to the other 5 classes if the other 5 also mesh with shotguns, and all in even greater ways than the soldier does.

I mean, I don't know if that's true but I'm just saying to look at it objectively. Maybe shotguns are just freaking amazing.

Modifié par Atemeus, 24 octobre 2011 - 05:50 .

[alex90c]

To be honest I'd put soldier 4th. I have no idea how shotguns are better with engineers or adepts, but with a sentinel you can tank which means you can get up close, with an infilitrator you can cloak + shotgun and well, vanguards are just made for them anyway so it's kinda unfair to compare the two.

Cool vid though.

[Janus Prospero]

alex90c wrote...

To be honest I'd put soldier 4th. I have no idea how shotguns are better with engineers or adepts, but with a sentinel you can tank which means you can get up close, with an infilitrator you can cloak + shotgun and well, vanguards are just made for them anyway so it's kinda unfair to compare the two.

Cool vid though.

Infiltrator is a glass cannon though. They don't have as much health or survivability as soldiers with adrenaline rush. Also, with a class based around sniping, you typically want to keep your distance.

[CoffeeHolic93]

Atemeus wrote...

Well, just because shotguns are great with Soldiers doesn't mean it can't be the worst compared to the other 5 classes if the other 5 also mesh with shotguns, and all in even greater ways than the soldier does.

I mean, I don't know if that's true but I'm just saying to look at it objectively. Maybe shotguns are just freaking amazing.

Then my unbiased list would be
1: Vanguard (shotgun god)
2: Infiltrator (cloakshots are easy to pull off)
3: Engineer (you can make any enemy not-target you and waltz up and shoot him)
4: Sentinel (walking tank)
5: Soldier (Harder than the rest, but can snipe with the shotgun if need be.)
6: Adept. (Haven't played adept more than once so I can't say)

That's just me though:wizard:

[CptBomBom00]

I really rarely use the shotgun on my soldier, even if I have all the upgardes, but I prefer geth shotgun to all other ones.

[Janus Prospero]

CptBomBom00 wrote...

I really rarely use the shotgun on my soldier, even if I have all the upgardes, but I prefer geth shotgun to all other ones.

Yeah, me too, to be honest. As a soldier, if you get the Revenant, there is never any need to use a Shotgun ever again. It just demolishes things at close range.

It's very satisfying to rush up to Harbinger, pop adrenaline rush and cut him down with it.

Modifié par Janus Prospero, 24 octobre 2011 - 06:04 .

[stonbw1]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Gabriel Stelinski wrote...

Preston Watamaniuk wrote...

Any class can carry any weapon.[...]Every class can carry 5 weapons, BUT there is a really big penalty to doing so if you are playing anything but a Soldier. Generally in my Adept runs I like to take a Tempest and a Carnifex.[...]

So I could finally have that definitive experience of carrying only an assault rifle and a pistol? Oh, HELL YEAH!

i totally agree with this.

Me too.  This is the type of thing that really boosts replayability.  Kudos BW.  Much like the achievements for ME1 that took multiple playthroughs (and thus experiences), this would be a real neat addition to equip in a style of your choosing. Let's just hope that one weapon isn't overpowered (i.e. pistol in ME1).

[CptBomBom00]

So if I play my soldier I can basically, have Mattock 96, Phalax,Sniper rifle,Smg, and a heavy weapon?

[ZenJestr]

CptBomBom00 wrote...

So if I play my soldier I can basically, have Mattock 96, Phalax,Sniper rifle,Smg, and a heavy weapon?

if you wish, yes.

you can wield all 5 weapons if you want.
-Assault Rifle
-Shotgun
-Sniper Rifle
-Pistol
-Submachine Gun

+Heavy Weapon

if you only want to go with an assault rigle, a pistol, a sniper and an SMG, that's your choice...

if you really want, you can go into battle with nothing but a pistol if you really want to be hardcore (INSANITY, LV.1 SOLDIER, NO POWERS, NO UPGRADES, NO MEDI-GEL, NO OMNI-BLADE, PREDATOR PISTOL ONLY)