364 réponses à ce sujet

[tonnactus]

didymos1120 wrote...

Not necessary.  It just really cut down on the tedium factor.

On the hardest difficulty,with low level biotics, this was necessary in addition with warp. The only other way was to fool the Ai...

Epic777 wrote...


If only, it was the immunity spamming that made things tough.

The removal of immunity was right because that was as stupid as ammo powers.
But they leave fortification for vorcha...
And enemies like warden kuril still take far to much bullets to kill them.(like every other Blue Sun Commander)

Modifié par tonnactus, 17 décembre 2011 - 11:45 .

[Bleachrude]

Sidney wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

Its too late for this now, but it feels like Mass Effect would have really benefited from a "freeform" leveling mechanic in which you have a pool of skills to invest in.

You are referring to soemthing like SPECIAL in fallout? If so, yes that is the best character system because it doesn't have the stupidity of class skills nor the equally stupid "use it" approach of TES games.

That's not actually true...Coming from the tabletop RPG side, freeform point systems like GURPS (the inspiration for the SPECIAL system in fallout), one of the things that happens is characters start to resemble each other more closely.

A class system FORCES a player to switch combat styles whenever they switch classes but with freeform, there's no need. Fallout has this problem itself as there is an optimum breakdown of skills

[Nashiktal]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...
The way it was in ME2, the only unique power the soldier got was adrenalin rush, and even then infiltrators got a lite version of it.

It will be even more impersonal in ME3.

You mean there is even LESS reason for me to be a soldier? 

BlahDog wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

Its too
late for this now, but it feels like Mass Effect would have really
benefited from a "freeform" leveling mechanic in which you have a pool
of skills to invest in.

Unlike Skyrim, Mass Effect is
more linear. You can't just say "I'm goning to wander over here with my
gun drawn and hope that levels" and keep doing that with every other
thing. The idea with this system is to give you ample opportunity to use
all skills given to you for a more varied experience. And then take
into account the fact that you choose a class to begin with and that
leveling up guns with an adept isn't exactly a good idea.

I think you are misunderstanding me. I was
referring more as taking all the skills ME2 had... Like adrenalin rush, A.I hacking, inferno, etc, and allowing you to use your limited pool of skill points to create your own class.

Just a straight freeform system wouldn't work and limitations would probably have to be made, but I think it would allow for a much better system overall. Like I said earlier though, too late for that.

Modifié par Nashiktal, 18 décembre 2011 - 12:44 .

[Nashiktal]

Bleachrude wrote...

Sidney wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...

Its too late for this now, but it feels like Mass Effect would have really benefited from a "freeform" leveling mechanic in which you have a pool of skills to invest in.

You are referring to soemthing like SPECIAL in fallout? If so, yes that is the best character system because it doesn't have the stupidity of class skills nor the equally stupid "use it" approach of TES games.

That's not actually true...Coming from the tabletop RPG side, freeform point systems like GURPS (the inspiration for the SPECIAL system in fallout), one of the things that happens is characters start to resemble each other more closely.

A class system FORCES a player to switch combat styles whenever they switch classes but with freeform, there's no need. Fallout has this problem itself as there is an optimum breakdown of skills

Ah but essentially the only thing keeping classes from playing similar was one of two things...

1. Gun access. Vanguards had limited range for example, but now with the ME3 system any class can use ANY gun. Thus eliminating one of the soldier's few advantages, and eliminating one of the few limiters for the rest.

2. Abilities. These are still around, but from what we have seen so far classes will still share a wide variety of powers like in ME2, like ammo and the shared biotic/tech powers.

The only thing I can see from all this is making the soldier even LESS relevant and making all the other classes rather similar.

At least with a freeform system (remember we are using abilities here not stat points) we could build our own class and grumble about some of the more (seemingly) illogical design choices like certain shared powers.

Its not perfect, and its obviously not going to happen, but at least thinking about it makes me feel better as a soldier player.

Modifié par Nashiktal, 18 décembre 2011 - 12:50 .

[sympathyforsaren]

Ammo powers as a "skill" is ridiculous. If shooting was a Skill, as it should be, ammo powers would make sense as a type of perk or what have you, although even then ammo powers should be in direct correlation with a weapon and the weapon's upgrading, as well as the special ammo itself being lootable in the game world. Ammunition simply does not work as a power, it doesn't make sense and its pretty cheesy.

What would make much more sense, like I said, is to have shooting as a Skill (with standard shooting being a starting point with statistical increases in accuracy up to pinpoint precision given as the Skill is levelled, as well as weapon stability and reload times) and have ammo abilities available VIA upgrade from merchants and looting (especially as a reward after a tough enemy/end of mission, with rare and special ones hidden throughout the galaxy.

The current system is pretty meh.

[wizardryforever]

sympathyforsaren wrote...

Ammo powers as a "skill" is ridiculous. If shooting was a Skill, as it should be, ammo powers would make sense as a type of perk or what have you, although even then ammo powers should be in direct correlation with a weapon and the weapon's upgrading, as well as the special ammo itself being lootable in the game world. Ammunition simply does not work as a power, it doesn't make sense and its pretty cheesy.

What would make much more sense, like I said, is to have shooting as a Skill (with standard shooting being a starting point with statistical increases in accuracy up to pinpoint precision given as the Skill is levelled, as well as weapon stability and reload times) and have ammo abilities available VIA upgrade from merchants and looting (especially as a reward after a tough enemy/end of mission, with rare and special ones hidden throughout the galaxy.

The current system is pretty meh.

If the player is the one doing the aiming, weapon skills should not exist.  The skill in that case is in the hands of the player, not the character.  The only thing weapon skills do in player-aimed games is increase frustration as the player aims perfectly yet misses because he hasn't leveled up his skill.  It's not because of weapon properties, environmental factors, or poor aim, but some arbitrary number that says, "you miss."  It wasn't that big of a deal in ME1, because you had infinite ammo, but now that thermal clips are in (let's not go there, shall we?), missing and wasting ammo because of some arbitrary stat or random number generator is just stupid.

In the case of ammo powers, it's about learning to use your gun in new and different ways, which is essentially what your "weapon skills" are.  So you really should be okay with it, if I read your argument correctly.

[Someone With Mass]

Nashiktal wrote...
You mean there is even LESS reason for me to be a soldier? 

Just saying. The slow motion deal isn't just restricted to Infiltrators and Soldiers.

But, hey, you can make the Concussion Shot carry the effect of any ammo power (Warp and AP ammo included) if that makes you feel better.

[Someone With Mass]

wizardryforever wrote...

If the player is the one doing the aiming, weapon skills should not exist.  The skill in that case is in the hands of the player, not the character.  The only thing weapon skills do in player-aimed games is increase frustration as the player aims perfectly yet misses because he hasn't leveled up his skill.  It's not because of weapon properties, environmental factors, or poor aim, but some arbitrary number that says, "you miss."  It wasn't that big of a deal in ME1, because you had infinite ammo, but now that thermal clips are in (let's not go there, shall we?), missing and wasting ammo because of some arbitrary stat or random number generator is just stupid.

In the case of ammo powers, it's about learning to use your gun in new and different ways, which is essentially what your "weapon skills" are.  So you really should be okay with it, if I read your argument correctly.

It's such a weak excuse in Fallout 3 and New Vegas too. I can't hit or do high damage to an enemy because the digital and imaginary dice of the Guns skill said so.

Same thing with the dialoues. It was more dumb luck than anything else.

[Nashiktal]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Nashiktal wrote...
You mean there is even LESS reason for me to be a soldier? 

Just saying. The slow motion deal isn't just restricted to Infiltrators and Soldiers.

But, hey, you can make the Concussion Shot carry the effect of any ammo power (Warp and AP ammo included) if that makes you feel better.

Not really, that sounds like a slightly different version of the tech powers.

Come one bioware, show the soldiers some love.

[sympathyforsaren]

I disagree with both of you. It's personal preference, I guess, in what is desirable.

[Neverwinter_Knight77]

The title of this topic gives me deja vu.  I can see Bioware's perspective on this though.  What else are you going to give to a soldier besides Immunity?

[crimzontearz]

I have advocated modular skills for ME since after ME1



No one listened tho....

[InvincibleHero]

Andorfiend wrote...

Ammo clips damm near are game breaking for me, especially since they rub your face in how different they are by having Shepard complain that he doesn't have one in the first 10 seconds of the game. Never mind that he was dead when the damm things were invented and should instead be asking why his gun doesn't work, thereby giving Miranda a chance to exposition the stupid things into existence.

It is made evident by the game that 6 months passed between the events of ME and ME 2 before Shepard is KIA. You cannot claim TCs were not introduced in that time period. After all ME took place after months as well. As for development well given a geth thermal clip it should not have taken that long to reverse engineer and standardize and retrofit it to the current guns.

Alternatively, it could be a case where information was fed into Shepard in the rebuilding process. Nothing in game is conclusive about the Lazarus project. I think it is best forgotten myself.

[jasonsantanna]

InvincibleHero wrote...

Andorfiend wrote...

Ammo clips damm near are game breaking for me, especially since they rub your face in how different they are by having Shepard complain that he doesn't have one in the first 10 seconds of the game. Never mind that he was dead when the damm things were invented and should instead be asking why his gun doesn't work, thereby giving Miranda a chance to exposition the stupid things into existence.

It is made evident by the game that 6 months passed between the events of ME and ME 2 before Shepard is KIA. You cannot claim TCs were not introduced in that time period. After all ME took place after months as well. As for development well given a geth thermal clip it should not have taken that long to reverse engineer and standardize and retrofit it to the current guns.

Alternatively, it could be a case where information was fed into Shepard in the rebuilding process. Nothing in game is conclusive about the Lazarus project. I think it is best forgotten myself.

Same with Jacobs LM if Jacobs father had been lost for almost ten yrs. how do they have thermal clips, they should be using at least ME 1 weaponry or something older. . . lol

But it is only a game. . .

Modifié par jasonsantanna, 18 décembre 2011 - 04:29 .

[InvincibleHero]

jasonsantanna wrote...

Same with Jacobs LM if Jacobs father had been lost for almost ten yrs. how do they have thermal clips, they should be using at least ME 1 weaponry or something older. . . lol

But it is only a game. . .

Yeah I agree it is out of place there. Pure reward so players don't get stuck without ammo. I doubt they even thought of it. They could have put in a break and resupply from Normandy bit instead. Or to appease the overheat people had a weak gun be dropped using the ME standards midway.

[Andorfiend]

BlahDog wrote...
If you aren't getting Mass Effect for the gamplay, you're doing something wrong. I can promise that there are many sci-fi novels and movies that have much greater stories. I understand that you may be hooked on the ME seiries but if you can't enjoy the game part of a video game then it may be time to move on. If you can tolerate the gameplay then at least understand that some poeple really enjoy it and those are the people that Bioware cater to. And Bioware rightly does it, I do play games for a good story but I will sacrifice some of the story for the gameplay because at the end of the day all Mass Effect is, is a video game.

I did not buy ME 1 for the gameplay, I bought it in spite of the gameplay. As I said, I cannot play 1st person shooters, they give me vertigo.

However the lure of the promise they made with ME 1 was so appealing, that this would be a trilogy where your choices carried over from game to game, that I bought it anyway. No one had ever done it before, it was breathtakingly ambitious. So I bought it on a gamble to see if I could stomache the gameplay to enjoy the game.

It turns out I could. I can handle 3rd person shooters. it seems the visual disconnect is sufficent that my inner ear stops ****ing and I don't puke on my keyboard. Yay! I've still never bothered to actually buy one outside of the Mass Effect series however.

Yes, you can find better stories elsewhere than in games, but games offer something unique, something not found elsewhere except possibly in tabletop rpgs, the ability to interact with the story. To affect it's outcome, to put your own words in the characters mouth. And Mass Effect offered that on a grander scale than had ever been promised before.

Mass Effect 2 was fun. I enjoyed playing it, although not as much as ME 1. But there were visible signs of strain, hints that the devs were only now realizing just how crazy ambitious this project was. Which I don't understand. Anyone with even a little experience in math, programming, or scripting games should have been able to know from the intial presentation of the idea of the Mass Effect franchise in a boardroom somewhere just what they were getting into. Factorial math is not complex, but it does lead to really large number, really quickly.

So what worries me about the TC and Ammo powers is not really the silliness of them, but the worry that the tight focus on shootery gameplay is supposed to distract us from the man behind the curtain, who is having trouble keeping up with his own promises.

It really couldn't be more obvious that the tight focus into the deeply silly dirty dozen suicide mission in ME 2 was there entirely to distract us from how hard it would have been to really follow up on the choices made in ME 1. At the end of the game you decided who was ruling the freaking galaxy! In one of 4 outcomes!

So in ME 2 we found out they only actually captured the council state and we had to reselect Anderson vs Udina. Then we were sent to the outer fringes of the Galaxy so that we only ever saw the impact of that choice while on the Citadel, and our ability to visit the Citidel was severly limited. In the end, the most important choice made in ME 1 was reduced in impact to a few bits of dialogue from some merchants.

In ME 1 the 'no ammo' mechanic was a deliberate attempt to soften the shooter style gameplay to lure in non-shooter fans, like myself, to play a hybrid RPG/shooter. It worked, on me at least. And I kept up in ME 2 even when they put the damm ammo back in. Although I dare you to come up with an explaination for why, given the universality of heat clips, I cannot take the heat clip from my stupid heavy pistol and slap it into the weapon I want to use. But it was a clear shift from RPG/Shooter hybrid in the direction of pure shooter. And I don't buy pure shooters. I buy RPGs. So I have not pre-orderd ME 3, the way I did ME 2, because I'm waiting to hear what kind of game they chose to make. The one they promised me years ago? Or a shooter with a few RPG elements splashed in the corners and a poster on a wall somewhere that pretends to be the follow up to the choices I made in ME 1 and 2.

[Random citizen]

Listen, it is very true that there was lots of strange and even nonsensical features in ME, such as "immunity" and so on. The problem was that they was not only poor from a gameplay perspective but they had no functional and logical explanation within the lore or narrative. Ammo powers (as well characters not having access to abilities that actually reflect their characters) is a continuation of this trend in regard to the narrative logic aspect. It is good that they have tried to address this by explaining how omni-tools now is able to modify the fire from your weapon, but it would not be much of an advance if such a technology was not usable to all combatants. If it was not, there would still be a need for being able to carry different types of ammunition blocks that could be switched manually.

It would be very welcome to have a game that actually reflects the world and the characters that populate it.

[jasonsantanna]

Random citizen wrote...

Listen, it is very true that there was lots of strange and even nonsensical features in ME, such as "immunity" and so on. The problem was that they was not only poor from a gameplay perspective but they had no functional and logical explanation within the lore or narrative. Ammo powers (as well characters not having access to abilities that actually reflect their characters) is a continuation of this trend in regard to the narrative logic aspect. It is good that they have tried to address this by explaining how omni-tools now is able to modify the fire from your weapon, but it would not be much of an advance if such a technology was not usable to all combatants. If it was not, there would still be a need for being able to carry different types of ammunition blocks that could be switched manually.

It would be very welcome to have a game that actually reflects the world and the characters that populate it.

Yeah in a perfect world that would be great , I know a lot of ppl especially in these forums were disappointed in Jack , the in game cut scenes portray her has a bad ass with a biotic punch and all able to take out mechs without the use of a weapon . . . but in the actual game she was far beneath that . . , but it all has to do with game mechanics if she had actually been that powerful like the cut  scenes there would be no need for a Shepard or crew she could mop up the whole galaxy by herself. . .   

[Random citizen]

jasonsantanna wrote...

Random citizen wrote...

Listen, it is very true that there was lots of strange and even nonsensical features in ME, such as "immunity" and so on. The problem was that they was not only poor from a gameplay perspective but they had no functional and logical explanation within the lore or narrative. Ammo powers (as well characters not having access to abilities that actually reflect their characters) is a continuation of this trend in regard to the narrative logic aspect. It is good that they have tried to address this by explaining how omni-tools now is able to modify the fire from your weapon, but it would not be much of an advance if such a technology was not usable to all combatants. If it was not, there would still be a need for being able to carry different types of ammunition blocks that could be switched manually.

It would be very welcome to have a game that actually reflects the world and the characters that populate it.

Yeah in a perfect world that would be great , I know a lot of ppl especially in these forums were disappointed in Jack , the in game cut scenes portray her has a bad ass with a biotic punch and all able to take out mechs without the use of a weapon . . . but in the actual game she was far beneath that . . , but it all has to do with game mechanics if she had actually been that powerful like the cut  scenes there would be no need for a Shepard or crew she could mop up the whole galaxy by herself. . .   

Is that so?
Well... or perhaps certain situations require a little bit more to it then brute biotic strength hmmm? 
Think about it.

[crimzontearz]

for that matter Samara is seen pull in off a skycar from the air with biotics alone.....

[tonnactus]

The title of this topic gives me deja vu.  I can see Bioware's perspective on this though.  What else are you going to give to a soldier besides Immunity?

Secondary weapon modes like carnage...
Like in the first game,but without acurracy improvements.

[Sgt Stryker]

crimzontearz wrote...

for that matter Samara is seen pull in off a skycar from the air with biotics alone.....

I'm sure that's nothing compared to encasing 4 individuals in a biotic force field for several minutes during the "long walk" segment of the SM.

[jasonsantanna]

Uh. . . I think ppl are forgetting that its just a game , for balance reasons and game mechinics, the soldier was given ammo powers, you can pick many things that could have been but weren't :
1. Ammo powers for all classes
2. Everyone has omni tools . . . Tech powers for all
3. Again everyone has omni tools . . . Tech shield for all classes
4. ME1 everyone had access to shot gun . . . Carnage for all classes
5.ME 3. . . Everyone can throw . . . Why no grenades for all classes. . .
There is 5 arguements alone you can make . . . Why can't I . . .
But we have to have balance in the game , the only other way to do it would be to get rid of classes , let the player pick 6 of any powers and build your own Shep. . .

[Heimdall]

Gameplay lore/story segregation is something I've come to expect and accept to a degree. ME2 and ME3 are within those parameters.

Although...

2. Everyone has omni tools . . . Tech powers for all
3. Again everyone has omni tools . . . Tech shield for all classes

In theory each of those abilities requires specialized training to understand and utilize correctly.

4. ME1 everyone had access to shot gun . . . Carnage for all classes

That was one of things I hated about ME1. I hated being forced to carry around weapons I couldn't upgrade or really use effectively.

Personally I tend to prefer a class system, it gives parameters that barring some cases tend to make sense. It also makes some more sense from a lore standpoint. After-all, one can't simply pick up biotic abilities. A better idea might be to provide a hybrid system with unique abilities for each class and include a pool of general abilities each one can pick and choose from.

[Random citizen]

Game-play lore/story segregation is just a sloppy way to go about things when you did not design the game well to start with. This is especially true in "cinematic" and story driven games.

For not having an unified gameplay-lore/story means that the player is not experiencing the whole story. What is happening is not what is really happening, so to speak.