322 réponses à ce sujet

[Abraham_uk]

RPGamer13 wrote...

Oh my ****ing god, It's a ****ing game. Plenty games has dual wielding, even the "realistic shooter" Modern Warfare 3.

I'd love to see dual handguns and SMGs in Mass Effect. That'd be awesome.

Since when is a giant ****ing nuker that doesn't kill its user realistic?  Since when are laser guns realistic?  Since when is alien races realistic?

This is ****ing sci-fi we're talking about.  Yes, some of it is based on real science, but it's still fake and not REALISTIC.

I have to agree with you here. I was merely inquiring into the realism of dual wielding because I'm genuinely interested about whether or not it's a feasible tactic in real life. Either way it would look AWESOME in Mass Effect, even if it's completly stupid. That Cain (nuclear weapon) is stupid, but it's fun.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 01 décembre 2011 - 11:03 .

[DiebytheSword]

Luc0s wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

Still... you would imply that it's possible for dual-wielding to work in ME if you let experienced assassin's or a top Cerberus officier to go dual-wielding while under Shepard's command. I would prefer ME to be consistent in this. Either have this feature or don't because keeping it only for squadmates would draw complaints that Shepard should also have the option etc. 
 In the end, if it's so ineffective why would Shepard allow his (assumed) squadmates to use them? It's just not consistent to what you have already stated. 

The way how character use weapons can tell something about their origins, personality and background.

dual-wielding gunslingering fits a merc, criminal or assassin, but it doesn't fit a militairy elite soldier. It's all about keeping this believable. A merc with dual-wielding pistols is believabe, a commanding officer with dual-wielding pistols isn't.

Thane with dual-wielding pistols would be like a Max Payne in space, or a Neo in space. I can see that happening. It fits his character and background as a merc/assasin.

Miranda with dual-wielding pistols would be like Lara Croft in space. I can see that happening. it fits her personality and background.

I mostly agree with this post, I disagree on your assertion that assasins and mercinaries would always befit dual weilding.  That would utterly depend on the assasin or mercinary.  If we are talking abou the crass terrorist kind, I agree.  However, there are assasins and mercinaries who have no doubt had training equal to the military elite/special forces kind, if not actually leaving the special forces and turning mercinary.  In Thane's case, he was trained by the Hanar to serve as a tool of their will.  The Drell assasins trained by the hanar would then have similar training to the STG, or any other black ops group.  While Thane is an merc assasin now, he was a highly trained military black ops assasin earlier.

[Tthane]

"Its just a game!"

Personally, I'm not looking for a game, i'm looking for an alternate reality. Using a pistol in the first place instead of an assault rifle is just goofy anyway. Dual wielding just looks bad in my opinion too, two out-stretched arms pointing forward, yuch. Sorry, my mind is too tainted with reality. They seriously need to make different versions of games for adults. 8 - 10 years ago i heard the average age of a gamer was 32. Well, were getting older and older and these games aren't matching the pace maturity wise. I say this in part because i wish everyone could get their way, not just me.

[Il Divo]

Well, this is a sci-fi setting, which itself isn't justification. But I could see Bioware shoehorning in an explanation about how genetic engineering or augmentations have allowed human reflexes/accuracy to reach the point where dual-wielding has become a viable strategy in the Mass Effect era. Having said that, I do think the appearance of dual-wielding in the ME universe would still feel very strange and don't think it would add anything significant to the experience.

Modifié par Il Divo, 02 décembre 2011 - 12:03 .

[StarcloudSWG]

Even with laser sights, dual wielding doesn't give you any advantage.

Some of you might remember the Mechwarrior game, and the Mechwarrior Battlepod cockpit simulators that allowed you and seven to nine other people to pilot giant robots against each other.

The earliest versions had two different targeting reticules; One for the left arm and one for the right arm. Watching people play, and getting feedback, the developers noticed that there would be a distinct pause every time the player's attention had to shift away from the reticules. In asking about it, they discovered that the players routinely had to reorient and remind themselves *which targeting reticule was which*. They also noticed, given a choice, an incredibly strong tendency to settle both targeting reticules on a single target.

The result? They did away with two targeting reticules and had all the weapons aim at the same point.

How this translates into dual wielding should be obvious; Even trained and experienced people have difficulties focusing on two different things at the same time.

One firearm. One aim point. That's what Mass Effect should continue with, just like the first and second games.

[Colintastic]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

Even with laser sights, dual wielding doesn't give you any advantage.

Some of you might remember the Mechwarrior game, and the Mechwarrior Battlepod cockpit simulators that allowed you and seven to nine other people to pilot giant robots against each other.

The earliest versions had two different targeting reticules; One for the left arm and one for the right arm. Watching people play, and getting feedback, the developers noticed that there would be a distinct pause every time the player's attention had to shift away from the reticules. In asking about it, they discovered that the players routinely had to reorient and remind themselves *which targeting reticule was which*. They also noticed, given a choice, an incredibly strong tendency to settle both targeting reticules on a single target.

The result? They did away with two targeting reticules and had all the weapons aim at the same point.

How this translates into dual wielding should be obvious; Even trained and experienced people have difficulties focusing on two different things at the same time.

One firearm. One aim point. That's what Mass Effect should continue with, just like the first and second games.

Those battlepods were AWESOME. Especially when you played with all the effects on (heat/damaged limbs/etc). I remember playing those things constantly at the Wizards of the Coast home office in Seattle. I think by the time I got to them though one joystick was used for movement and the other for aiming, kinda like how all FPS operate now. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

RPGamer13 wrote...

Oh my ****ing god, It's a ****ing game. Plenty games has dual wielding, even the "realistic shooter" Modern Warfare 3.

I'd love to see dual handguns and SMGs in Mass Effect. That'd be awesome.

Since when is a giant ****ing nuker that doesn't kill its user realistic?  Since when are laser guns realistic?  Since when is alien races realistic?

This is ****ing sci-fi we're talking about.  Yes, some of it is based on real science, but it's still fake and not REALISTIC.

Oh look it's this post again. For the >9000th time, the "it's just sci-fi" excuse doesn't fly. Just because there are aliens, and artificial intelligence, and faster-than-light travel, doesn't mean the mundane things don't stay the same. Wood still burns, people still come down when they jump (on a planetary body), and trying to shoot two guns at once will still result in horrendous accuracy, unless you're a Terminator. So horrendous that no military in their right mind would allow their soldiers to pull such a stunt.

This. 

Dual wielding pistols?  WTF?  And then people wonder why we cringe every time EA shows that they want to attract the FPS and online MP crowd...

[InvincibleHero]

Except people forget one fact ME guns are largely recoiless which would negate the negative aiming aspects. If there is asetting where it makes sense it is ME with software driven guns that don't need reloaded and have no discernable recoil. Sighting two hand guns on a single target should be no harder than pointing your two index fingers at the same point. ME guns shoot and hit where their LOS is period.

The part about shooting from the hip being inaccurate is bunk. There was a man in the guiness book that drew and shot with an old revolver from the hip and shot things like dimes out of the air at 30-40 feet and multiple targets. The skill of the shooter is what is important.

[Sgt Stryker]

No recoil, you say?

[Heather Cline]

Yes there is recoil from guns and no dual wielding is not only not recommended, again it's been proven that you will miss more than you hit your target. I don't care what two people say about Mythbusters. They take hard data and prove either something is confirmed, plausible, or busted. The dual wielding is not even a plausible way of firing. Firing one handed is the best way to fire. Looking down the sights of a gun, taking aim and hitting your target. Firing two separate guns at the same time not only causes you to miss more, it opens you up for retaliation and inevitable defeat. Just because it looks cool in the movies and the good guy always hits his target doesn't mean it works in real life.

This is why ME series I believe went with the one gun in a hand attack style. Cops use it, Military personnel use it. It's a standard that has been proven effective and true against any other kinds of firing.

[InvincibleHero]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

No recoil, you say?

Codex said they are and I did not say zero. I said largely recoiless. They have less kick than a modern .22 for how much damage they can do. Point remains valid.

[InvincibleHero]

Heather Cline wrote...

Yes there is recoil from guns and no dual wielding is not only not recommended, again it's been proven that you will miss more than you hit your target. I don't care what two people say about Mythbusters. They take hard data and prove either something is confirmed, plausible, or busted. The dual wielding is not even a plausible way of firing. Firing one handed is the best way to fire. Looking down the sights of a gun, taking aim and hitting your target. Firing two separate guns at the same time not only causes you to miss more, it opens you up for retaliation and inevitable defeat. Just because it looks cool in the movies and the good guy always hits his target doesn't mean it works in real life.

This is why ME series I believe went with the one gun in a hand attack style. Cops use it, Military personnel use it. It's a standard that has been proven effective and true against any other kinds of firing.

Well ME handguns are way larger than current weapons as well. Their stopping power is also immense. This makes it more conducive to just one gun.

Do you know the average trained cop hits an armed assailant 12% of the time  from ten feet or less (my brother told me he wasa cop and had CJ in college) and an untrained thug 8% of the time. With odds like those two handguns might make sense. I can only imagine the accuracy rate of soldier in field hundreds of feet away with assault weapons. ME weapons kill these in all regards.

Though why wouldn't everyone just use ARs instead of pistols? They have as much range if not more than handguns and can be nearly as accurate and burst/auto fire for easy enemy swiss cheesing.

[Sgt Stryker]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Sgt Stryker wrote...

No recoil, you say?

Codex said they are and I did not say zero. I said largely recoiless. They have less kick than a modern .22 for how much damage they can do. Point remains valid.

In your second sentence you said the weapons "have no discernable recoil." I can definitely discern quite a bit of recoil in that video, and it's comparable to a pistol with a much larger caliber than a .22. Granted, Miranda is using an SMG, and Shepard is using an M6 Carnifex, but I can still see a good amount of recoil.

[InvincibleHero]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

I'm astonished people are still arguing for this.

I could care less which way BW ultimately goes. I think it could be a viable option in the universe for what I posted. People are tending to be too extreme in condemnation and basing things on current tech for shouting down something that would be optional in a fictional futuristic setting.

So why the venom since you don't have to use dual wield if it is an option among several? Yeah people just want what they want and don't play nice to get it. Yay for self interest.  

[InvincibleHero]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

Sgt Stryker wrote...

No recoil, you say?

Codex said they are and I did not say zero. I said largely recoiless. They have less kick than a modern .22 for how much damage they can do. Point remains valid.

In your second sentence you said the weapons "have no discernable recoil." I can definitely discern quite a bit of recoil in that video, and it's comparable to a pistol with a much larger caliber than a .22. Granted, Miranda is using an SMG, and Shepard is using an M6 Carnifex, but I can still see a good amount of recoil.

Just a different way to say low recoil. If you look at full-speed in game it doesn't look to have kick at all with handguns. So they visually represent minor recoil in gameplay videos what does that prove? So try showing a high power modern handgun like a desert eagle or magnum? You'll see huge recoil and those guns have the merest fraction of power and larger loads than ME guns. Still doesn't prove it would be implausible at all.

Modifié par InvincibleHero, 02 décembre 2011 - 04:39 .

[Sgt Stryker]

I'm not saying the recoil is as extreme as that of a Magnum or Desert Eagle. If I had to compare it to a real-life caliber, I'd say the recoil in the video is roughly equivalent  to that of a 9mm pistol. Quite sufficient to throw off one's aim at all but extreme close range if dual-wielding.

Modifié par Sgt Stryker, 02 décembre 2011 - 04:46 .

[InvincibleHero]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

I'm not saying the recoil is as extreme as that of a Magnum or Desert Eagle. If I had to compare it to a real-life caliber, I'd say the recoil in the video is roughly equivalent  to that of a 9mm pistol. Quite sufficient to throw off one's aim at all but extreme close range if dual-wielding.

Yeah so compared to those recoil is minimal in ME guns. Which only asserts that it would make it more likely. The guns do have autocorrective software as well. I love the codex that it says firing in a gale is the same as without. How exactly does it keep your arm from moving from where you're aiming? How does it correct aim really? I guess it makes the bullet hit where you want making it heavier or lighter and making it faster or slower to achieve dead hit.

So how could one get less than 8% hit rate by firing two guns at ten feet or less?

[Sgt Stryker]

Yes, but not quite as minimal as that of a .22 pistol. Closer to a 9mm, as I said in my last post. As far as auto-corrective software is concerned, I doubt that the bullet is somehow "guided" in mid-air by the gun's computer. Otherwise, why wouldn't the same tech be extended to ship-board mass accelerators? A much simpler explanation is that the sights are adjustable, and the gun has computer-controlled mechanisms that adjust the sight to compensate for wind and distance to target. Current guns feature adjustable sights already, but these have to be calibrated by hand through trial and error, so it seems perfectly plausible for this process to become automated 170 years from now.

Modifié par Sgt Stryker, 02 décembre 2011 - 05:26 .

[InvincibleHero]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Yes, but not quite as minimal as that of a .22 pistol. Closer to a 9mm, as I said in my last post. As far as auto-corrective software is concerned, I doubt that the bullet is somehow "guided" in mid-air by the gun's computer. Otherwise, why wouldn't the same tech be extended to ship-board mass accelerators? A much simpler explanation is that the sights are adjustable, and the gun has computer-controlled mechanisms that adjust the sight to compensate for wind and distance to target. Current guns feature adjustable sights already, but these have to be calibrated by hand through trial and error, so it seems perfectly plausible for this process to become automated 170 years from now.

I meant more like internally as the trigger is pressed to hit LOS. The autocorrecting sights in real time seems too implausible and would be unstable IMO. You slightly move your arm or a wind gusts and the sight would be far from where you'd want it. it would make it more innaccurate IMO.

[Sgt Stryker]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Yes, but not quite as minimal as that of a .22 pistol. Closer to a 9mm, as I said in my last post. As far as auto-corrective software is concerned, I doubt that the bullet is somehow "guided" in mid-air by the gun's computer. Otherwise, why wouldn't the same tech be extended to ship-board mass accelerators? A much simpler explanation is that the sights are adjustable, and the gun has computer-controlled mechanisms that adjust the sight to compensate for wind and distance to target. Current guns feature adjustable sights already, but these have to be calibrated by hand through trial and error, so it seems perfectly plausible for this process to become automated 170 years from now.

I meant more like internally as the trigger is pressed to hit LOS. The autocorrecting sights in real time seems too implausible and would be unstable IMO. You slightly move your arm or a wind gusts and the sight would be far from where you'd want it. it would make it more innaccurate IMO.

Are you saying the electromagnetic fields within the gun 's accelerator are adjusted instead? Hmm, that makes more sense, and you wouldn't have to worry about mechanical wear and tear from tiny servos that constantly adjust an iron sight. Perhaps that also explains why the barrels have such a large diameter. I like that idea. 

Modifié par Sgt Stryker, 02 décembre 2011 - 05:39 .

[FutureBoy81]

Why not ? Multi-player, improved combat, more Guns lets go for the gusto ...