364 réponses à ce sujet

[Random citizen]

jasonsantanna wrote...

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. . .

Sorry but "game" is no indicator of quality, just as "movie" or "book" are not either.
That most games have a poor stadard is no real excuse unless you do not strive to do better.
That is why I call this an "Ed-woodian" attitude. As far as I've heard, he is/was (in)famous for excusing problems within his films with "its just a movie"

[Heimdall]

Random citizen wrote...

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.

And I must have a problem with that?

I like my lore one way and my gameplay another.  As long as the degree of segregation is not too great, I prefer things that way.

I've gotten into arguments with Sylvius about this...

Anyway, a game is not a movie.  If a movie's plot contradicts itself then that's a serious problem.  This is very different.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 19 décembre 2011 - 07:07 .

[darkangelvxvx]

Everyone seems to be forgetting that each and every class will start, and end, with a different set of parameters.

Soldiers:

More HP
More Weapons damage
Weapons focused combat styled
Skills associated to gun-play and quick reaction
Easily the quickest "pick up and play" character
Most well rounded class due to ammo based powers (able to hinder enemy fire with Disruptor, able to hault with Cryo, and able to deal damage with incendiary) or deal with biotic barriers with concussive shot.
"Run and gun" Tank/DPS
Lacks Biotics/Tech attacks
Easily overwhelmed by large groups of attacking enemies due to lack of crowd control skills or powers (shotguns/grenades only do so much)

Infiltrator:
Long range single target combat specialist
"gun and hide" tactics associated with this class.
Very difficult to fight at close range, unless cloaked (Heavy melee will likely only stun)
Medium HP similar to Vanguard.


Vanguard:
Close range single/few target combat specialist
High risk High reward (lower HP than Soldier)
Gunplay/Biotic related combat will likely not be as effective at either as a Soldier or an Adept.

Engineer:
Tech based combat specialist
Lower HP due to non-combat related skill set
"Gun and hinder" combat set focused on shields/synthetics and harassing tougher enemies
more of a "Strategic" mindset required than combat oriented classes like the Vanguard, Soldier or infiltrator.

Sentinel:
Tech/Biotic focused combat
Gunplay not associated heavily with this class, and generally deal less overall damage with weapons.
Close/medium ranged "Paladin" styled tanking class with the ability to regen shields, much quicker than other classes.
Skills associated to class more directed towards "Control and corrupt" class strategic mindset.

Adept:
Lower HP than other classes (similar to Engineer)
Primarily AOE associated skills "control and disable" or "Run and hide" mindset focused on halting or exposing enemies to the more combat oriented classes.
Little to no actual "combat related skills" (skills used for stripping defenses) aside from warp, Reave or "warp ammo."


All of the classes are used for one thing or another. None of them can survive without the help of other classes.

Modifié par darkangelvxvx, 19 décembre 2011 - 06:58 .

[RoboticWater]

Random citizen wrote...

jasonsantanna wrote...

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. . .

Sorry but "game" is no indicator of quality, just as "movie" or "book" are not either.
That most games have a poor stadard is no real excuse unless you do not strive to do better.
That is why I call this an "Ed-woodian" attitude. As far as I've heard, he is/was (in)famous for excusing problems within his films with "its just a movie"

Yes, but saying "it's a game" and "it's a movie" mean completely different things. In a movie all you need to worry about is the story becasue that is all a movie offers. In a game you have to worry about the story and the gameplay. It would be inexcusable for Bioware to change reapers into giant flying cupcakes because that makes no sense to the lore and it would have no positive effects on gameplay. Ammo powers may effect the story but it had a positive effect on gameplay and that's what matters most.

Modifié par BlahDog, 19 décembre 2011 - 07:06 .

[darkangelvxvx]

BlahDog wrote...

Random citizen wrote...

jasonsantanna wrote...

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. . .

Sorry but "game" is no indicator of quality, just as "movie" or "book" are not either.
That most games have a poor stadard is no real excuse unless you do not strive to do better.
That is why I call this an "Ed-woodian" attitude. As far as I've heard, he is/was (in)famous for excusing problems within his films with "its just a movie"

Yes, but saying "it's a game" and "it's a movie" mean completely different things. In a movie all you need to worry about is the story becasue that is all a movie offers. In a game you have to worry about the story and the gameplay. It would be inexcusable for Bioware to change reapers into giant flying cupcakes because that makes no sense to the lore and it would have no positive effects on gameplay. Ammo powers may effect the story but it had a positive effect on gameplay and that's what matters most.

I'd personally love to see Reaper-cakes <.<

... would make them a lot friendlier

Modifié par darkangelvxvx, 19 décembre 2011 - 07:08 .

[Sgt Stryker]

Random citizen wrote...

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.

In that case, prepare yourself for disappointment with a lot of games, because your expectations are unrealistic.

[jasonsantanna]

Random citizen, I feel what you are saying . . . I would like the best qualify game to play and by no means do I make excuse for BW. . . What I mean is that I know they read these forums and they weigh heavy on the game development. . . But you can not put every single thing every player wants into the game . . . You take the majority and what would work well in said game. . . You have to believe that the franchise is some thing special or else why would so many of us be here discussions the many workings of ME. . . Your not going to please everyone, what I think is cool or ok you may not im fine with ammo powers you may not be, to me the majority rule applied with the ammo owers

[Random citizen]

@ BlahDog
Lets be clear about sa couple of things here: Yes its true, there are medial differences, movies are not interactive in the way computer games are. So you are quite right, a game has to worry ablot the two of them. Your cupcake example is not serious. Mass effect has a rich and captivating setting that could offer excellent gameplay. No, gameplay does not automatically matter more then story (only for those who play games mainly because of gameplay, for those who play in order to experience a story its pretty much the other way around), and contrary to what people might believe the choice is not automatically between these two sides causing alienation and discussions like this, as a developer you also have the possibility to try and integrate them into one great experience.
While it does require a little bit more in terms of talent and craftmanship, its entirely possibly to create engaging and intense gameplay that fits well into the setting of the story.
And no it does not have to be perfect.
And if you encourage modding and support, people can actually fix a lot of these things themselves,

Modifié par Random citizen, 19 décembre 2011 - 07:59 .

[Random citizen]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Random citizen wrote...

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.

In that case, prepare yourself for disappointment with a lot of games, because your expectations are unrealistic.

Generally I have very low expectations regarding most games. There is not much art or workmanship out there worth mentioning. Most devs does not seem to care that much, they just want to produce some light and passable entertainment and cash in.  I have however, noted that there are a lot of talent and some praiseworthy ambition in some developers out there. Bioware is one of them. (although there has been some worrying development in the recent years) I am just encouraging  them to raise the bar and with it the quality.

Modifié par Random citizen, 19 décembre 2011 - 08:12 .

[RoboticWater]

Random citizen wrote...


@ BlahDog
Lets be clear about sa couple of things here: Yes its true, there are medial differences, movies are not interactive in the way computer games are. So you are quite right, a game has to worry ablot the two of them. Your cupcake example is not serious. Mass effect has a rich and captivating setting that could offer excellent gameplay. No, gameplay does not automatically matter more then story (only for those who play games mainly because of gameplay, for those who play in order to experience a story its pretty much the other way around), and contrary to what people might believe the choice is not automatically between these two sides causing alienation and discussions like this, as a developer you also have the possibility to try and integrate them into one great experience.
While it does require a little bit more in terms of talent and craftmanship, its entirely possibly to create engaging and intense gameplay that fits well into the setting of the story.
And no it does not have to be perfect.
And if you encourage modding and support, people can actually fix a lot of these things themselves,

Alright, I'll give you another example; let's say Bioware changed biotics so much they were in now way relatable to the lore or the other games. These new powers made the gameplay much better. I would not be okay with this. Ammo powers are different though. They don't make sense in context of the lore but do they destroy an integral part of the story? No, they make a tiny impact on the lore for an overall better gaming experience.

I agree that Bioware could have made something that worked and made sense but once they had a system that worked, there was little reason to use up development time to make it fit the lore. If they had to change something integral to Mass Effect's story and gameplay like biotics, then they would have to be much more careful with it becaause it is something unique to ME lore. Ammo modification on the other hand isn't a very unique idea and won't affect the story in any way so it should have much more room for change. 

And I agree with modding except that companies shouldn't release mod tools thinking that the modders will need to fix anything major.

[tonnactus]

BlahDog wrote...
 Ammo powers may effect the story but it had a positive effect on gameplay and that's what matters most.

It couldnt be so difficult to just assign a hotkey to an ammo type or place in the wheel without making them "powers".

[DCarter]

I don't know why you can't purchase/find differen't types of ammo and swap them in and out of different guns. That's a pretty common game design.

[crimzontearz]

I love how pointing out ways in which the gameplay could have achieved the desired feel (more shootery) without crapping on the lore simply result in dismissive commets.....without mentioning of course the fact that there are great games that have good gameplay that does break the lore but people keep regurgitating the line that these changes were necessary to make the gameplay better.

[hawat333]

Yes, it is a really sloppy thing in the game, but I think it will be the same for ME3. Since we have our skills transferred, if they don't redesign the given skills completely, we will still have those ammo powers.

[jasonsantanna]

@hawat333 why do you think ammo powers are sloppy design for the game?