150 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

jreezy wrote...

robarcool wrote...

D3MON-SOVER3IGN wrote...

im actually stuck on collector ship right now. the revenant kinda sucks lol

Use inferno ammo with it and see hoe it vanhishes every avatar of Harbinger into oblivion in seconds.

Not on Insanity it won't.

Besides, all it takes is a flashbang to turn Harbinger into a complete pushover.

[Triumphus]

The difficulty level of ME2, even on Insanity, is minimal.  As long as ME3 is an increase to the difficulty of ME2 by a large amount, the game should be able to present players with something that requires genuine ability.  At the very least, some sections of ME3 should possess a truly difficult situation for the player to overcome.  I am aware that BioWare is moving the difficulty levels by one to increase the challenge; however, from what I have seen in ME2 I am unsure if it will suffice.

[robarcool]

jreezy wrote...

robarcool wrote...

D3MON-SOVER3IGN wrote...

im actually stuck on collector ship right now. the revenant kinda sucks lol

Use inferno ammo with it and see hoe it vanhishes every avatar of Harbinger into oblivion in seconds.

Not on Insanity it won't.

Oh, can't I be a little bit dramatic!

[Firesteel]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

jreezy wrote...

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

I think it'd be more Insane if instead of focusing on enemies' defenses, focus on their offensive powers.

Then it just becomes cheap like every other game that has multiple difficulties. I think instead of making enemies harder on higher difficulties through some cheap trick they would be better off making the enemies smarter.

right, enemy protections arent a cheap method of creating a challegne at all!

*head explodes*

i always thought the way ME1 handeled difficulties wasnt wanted. with just +damage and +health. but then we get ME2, adn its the same thing, with a rock paper scissors element to it. i just never found that to be a challenge.
id rather have enemies using biotics and tech mines on me. more like ME1 where we saw engineers and biotics that took out sheps sheilds or weapons, or even put shep on his ass. ME2 only offered warp bots. id rahter have destructable cover, making me move out of my sweet sniper spot. id rather have varrying AI, even something as simple as casual = enemies with pistols, vet = enemies with SMG, hard = enemies with revenants. whatever, theres alot of methods to make the game harder, im sure we couldall list  some good ones.

as much as i dont like ME2s gameplay philosophies, ME3 really seems to be getting its act together. ive seen mention of enemies that serve different rolls in combat, like support(engineers with turrets), cover busters, ranged(red beam snipers!), and even melee(theose ninja sword dudes). i think that reaper-asari might be one of my favorite enemies in all of ME.

The reason for the "cheapness" is because computers are not our overloards yet.
But seriously. Computers are morons, they only do what you tell them to do, exactly how you tell them. This means they are only as smart as the programmer can make them. By this, they have a finite number of responses that are usually so small compared to us meat bags that they seem like idiots, because, well, they are. I would still say that after 10 years, Halo 1 has some of the best enemy AI out there, they would actually hide and ambush you in different situations every singe time you died, so you couldn't always know where they were. The cheapness is added to compensate for the lack of intelligence, If not for the cheapness, ME1 and ME2's insane modes would be like walking through a garden full of zombies, and you are omnipotent.

[alex90c]

If ME3 has anything like GoW1 and GoW3's insane settings, I'll be impressed.

[Yezdigerd]

It would be nice if Bioware got difficulty right,for once. Yes it's harder to actually give the enemy better AI and options, but it a great deal more rewarding then just slapping on more health and damage.
It's actually sad how easily BW's AI can be defeated and how poorly balanced some of the games are. ME1 was unplayable once you developed your "I win" buttons.

[robarcool]

Firesteel7 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

jreezy wrote...

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

I think it'd be more Insane if instead of focusing on enemies' defenses, focus on their offensive powers.

Then
it just becomes cheap like every other game that has multiple
difficulties. I think instead of making enemies harder on higher
difficulties through some cheap trick they would be better off making
the enemies smarter.

right, enemy protections arent a cheap method of creating a challegne at all!

*head explodes*

i
always thought the way ME1 handeled difficulties wasnt wanted. with
just +damage and +health. but then we get ME2, adn its the same thing,
with a rock paper scissors element to it. i just never found that to be a
challenge.
id rather have enemies using biotics and tech mines on
me. more like ME1 where we saw engineers and biotics that took out sheps
sheilds or weapons, or even put shep on his ass. ME2 only offered warp
bots. id rahter have destructable cover, making me move out of my sweet
sniper spot. id rather have varrying AI, even something as simple as
casual = enemies with pistols, vet = enemies with SMG, hard = enemies
with revenants. whatever, theres alot of methods to make the game
harder, im sure we couldall list  some good ones.

as much as i
dont like ME2s gameplay philosophies, ME3 really seems to be getting its
act together. ive seen mention of enemies that serve different rolls in
combat, like support(engineers with turrets), cover busters, ranged(red
beam snipers!), and even melee(theose ninja sword dudes). i think that
reaper-asari might be one of my favorite enemies in all of ME.

The reason for the "cheapness" is because computers are not our overloards yet.[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]
But
seriously. Computers are morons, they only do what you tell them to do,
exactly how you tell them. This means they are only as smart as the
programmer can make them. By this, they have a finite number of
responses that are usually so small compared to us meat bags that they
seem like idiots, because, well, they are. I would still say that after
10 years, Halo 1 has some of the best enemy AI out there, they would
actually hide and ambush you in different situations every singe time
you died, so you couldn't always know where they were. The cheapness is
added to compensate for the lack of intelligence, If not for the
cheapness, ME1 and ME2's insane modes would be like walking through a
garden full of zombies, and you are omnipotent.

True. Also, even games with good AI can have glitches. Crysis is an example.

Modifié par robarcool, 17 décembre 2011 - 08:57 .

[Firesteel]

Yezdigerd wrote...

It would be nice if Bioware got difficulty right,for once. Yes it's harder to actually give the enemy better AI and options, but it a great deal more rewarding then just slapping on more health and damage.
It's actually sad how easily BW's AI can be defeated and how poorly balanced some of the games are. ME1 was unplayable once you developed your "I win" buttons.

Even then, enemies took an absolute age or two to kill, due to the immunity spam. This does not make good gameplay. I played through ME1 once on insane to get the achievement and then never went higher than casual due to the ridiculous kill times and general stupidity of the AI, I would rather face idiots for 2 seconds instead of 2 minutes.

[Firesteel]

robarcool wrote...

Firesteel7 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

jreezy wrote...

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

I think it'd be more Insane if instead of focusing on enemies' defenses, focus on their offensive powers.

Then
it just becomes cheap like every other game that has multiple
difficulties. I think instead of making enemies harder on higher
difficulties through some cheap trick they would be better off making
the enemies smarter.

right, enemy protections arent a cheap method of creating a challegne at all!

*head explodes*

i
always thought the way ME1 handeled difficulties wasnt wanted. with
just +damage and +health. but then we get ME2, adn its the same thing,
with a rock paper scissors element to it. i just never found that to be a
challenge.
id rather have enemies using biotics and tech mines on
me. more like ME1 where we saw engineers and biotics that took out sheps
sheilds or weapons, or even put shep on his ass. ME2 only offered warp
bots. id rahter have destructable cover, making me move out of my sweet
sniper spot. id rather have varrying AI, even something as simple as
casual = enemies with pistols, vet = enemies with SMG, hard = enemies
with revenants. whatever, theres alot of methods to make the game
harder, im sure we couldall list  some good ones.

as much as i
dont like ME2s gameplay philosophies, ME3 really seems to be getting its
act together. ive seen mention of enemies that serve different rolls in
combat, like support(engineers with turrets), cover busters, ranged(red
beam snipers!), and even melee(theose ninja sword dudes). i think that
reaper-asari might be one of my favorite enemies in all of ME.

The reason for the "cheapness" is because computers are not our overloards yet.[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]
But
seriously. Computers are morons, they only do what you tell them to do,
exactly how you tell them. This means they are only as smart as the
programmer can make them. By this, they have a finite number of
responses that are usually so small compared to us meat bags that they
seem like idiots, because, well, they are. I would still say that after
10 years, Halo 1 has some of the best enemy AI out there, they would
actually hide and ambush you in different situations every singe time
you died, so you couldn't always know where they were. The cheapness is
added to compensate for the lack of intelligence, If not for the
cheapness, ME1 and ME2's insane modes would be like walking through a
garden full of zombies, and you are omnipotent.

True. Also, even games with good AI can have glitches. Crysis is an example.

Oh yes, the suposedly godly AI. Until we can make computers able to think creatively, no games' AI will ever be better than a human without any cheap tricks up their sleave.

[goofyomnivore]

Hopefully the flanking enemies are more effective and prevalent in Mass Effect 3.

[Yezdigerd]

Firesteel7 wrote...

Yezdigerd wrote...

It would be nice if Bioware got difficulty right,for once. Yes it's harder to actually give the enemy better AI and options, but it a great deal more rewarding then just slapping on more health and damage.
It's actually sad how easily BW's AI can be defeated and how poorly balanced some of the games are. ME1 was unplayable once you developed your "I win" buttons.

Even then, enemies took an absolute age or two to kill, due to the immunity spam. This does not make good gameplay. I played through ME1 once on insane to get the achievement and then never went higher than casual due to the ridiculous kill times and general stupidity of the AI, I would rather face idiots for 2 seconds instead of 2 minutes.

ME1 mooks can't activate immunity when affected by biotics, and only do so when shot at. At mid-level with biotic cooldown reductions you can keep every target constantly spinning and so they never activate immunity.  Shooting fish in a barrel describes ME1 insanity play.

[The Spamming Troll]

does anyone here remember playing the ME1 mission for wrexs armor?

that was one of the most difficult missions because the AI actually did act differently. they were able to run backwards while shooting, and no other AI in the game was programed to do that. it made that mission so much more demanding. it was also weird how every time i played that level, ton actus was always the last enemy i had to kill. maybe ton actus had some different AI programming too.

ive actually never played a game and felt like AI was really any different then the other. hell, for a while i thought alpha protcol had the best AI i had ever played against, because they did all kinds of random and weird things. i destinclty remember one time an enemy rushing me and putting me down to a sliver of health, only to turn around and run away shooting his gun in the air. i thought "holy crap, this guy is toying with me!" but then i found out alpha protocols AI was apparently really bad, and it kindof took the fun out of it for me.

[Annihilator27]

Gonna be fun starting off on Insanity right off the bat again.ME2 collector ambush was a pain in the a**!!!

[Wulfram]

jreezy wrote...

Exactly. A boost in defense or offense just because the difficulty is higher should never be the way to go. Sports games as well have had this problem with difficulty for years. Instead of the computer playing any smarter than usual they just have a higher probability for sucess the higher you go.

I don't think the AI in Mass Effect is good enough that you could justify restricting improvements to just the top level.

[xentar]

Ohei wrote...

I know it's probably a terrible idea and that I am going to get squashed like a bug, but is anyone else thinking of doing their first playthrough on Insanity or Hardcore, at least? It just makes it 100 times better. Sorry, had to get it out of my system.

I'd say those two difficulties are (or at least are supposed to be) vastly different. Given my ME2 experience, I am going to start at hardcore and drop down to veteran if it's that much more difficult than it was in ME2. Insanity, however, is not something I am interested in. As far as I am concerned, it should be targeted at masochists, not simply skilled players.

[Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut]

Yezdigerd wrote...

ME1 was unplayable once you developed your "I win" buttons.

I think this is a general problem with RPG games - I wouldn't say it makes them unplayable, but any game with some kind of crowd control or enemy-disabling ability is going to have wonky difficulty issues.

Compare Dragon Age: Origins - once you got enough of the good crowd-control spells, very few enemies remained authentically challenging. It only got tricky if you were fighting more enemies than you had crowd-control abilities for, if you were fighting them in enclosed spaces that let them get hits in before you had time to hit them with debuffs, or if they had crowd-control abilities of their own.

Or look at Witcher 2 - a big issue with that game's difficulty curve is that while your ability to dish out and take damage scales roughly equivalently with the challenges you face, your ability to control fights scales much faster in comparison to how difficult the fights are to control. While the enemies are balanced with you in terms of damage/hp numbers, they are not balanced with you in terms of your ability to fight groups of them, take one or more of them out of the fight with bombs/spells/finishing moves/etc, and so on.

So how do you deal with these issues without nerfing the player's ability to do fun stuff like throw people across the room?

I think DA:O had a few fights that showed how this might be done. For instance, Ser Cauthrien & co. combined numbers, close quarters, and crowd-control abilities. That fight forced you to quickly prioritize which targets you wanted to take out of the fight, use the terrain to bottleneck  enemies, deal with enemy crowd-control abilities, and so on. There were elements of fake difficulty ("Ser Cauthrien, y u no paralyzed by crushing prison?") but in general the fight struck me as intelligently designed to challenge a player with crowd-control capabilities.

I think this could be even easier to implement in Mass Effect, because cooldowns put a hard limit on how many enemies you can crowd-control at a time. So a fight with multiple enemies at multiple levels of threat (i.e., some might be flanking you, some might hit incredibly hard, etc.) would in fact force the player to decide where he/she wants to charge/throw a flashbang/put down a singularity/etc. So if you have large numbers of enemies that flank and use cover somewhat intelligently and that represent a credible threat to any character they outmaneuver, you can challenge players even without "lol, too much armor to pull/throw try again later" problems.

[slimgrin]

I never start with the hardest difficulty in a game. But I'll sure as hell give it a try eventually.

Modifié par slimgrin, 17 décembre 2011 - 05:28 .

[Firesteel]

Yezdigerd wrote...

Firesteel7 wrote...

Yezdigerd wrote...

It would be nice if Bioware got difficulty right,for once. Yes it's harder to actually give the enemy better AI and options, but it a great deal more rewarding then just slapping on more health and damage.
It's actually sad how easily BW's AI can be defeated and how poorly balanced some of the games are. ME1 was unplayable once you developed your "I win" buttons.

Even then, enemies took an absolute age or two to kill, due to the immunity spam. This does not make good gameplay. I played through ME1 once on insane to get the achievement and then never went higher than casual due to the ridiculous kill times and general stupidity of the AI, I would rather face idiots for 2 seconds instead of 2 minutes.

ME1 mooks can't activate immunity when affected by biotics, and only do so when shot at. At mid-level with biotic cooldown reductions you can keep every target constantly spinning and so they never activate immunity.  Shooting fish in a barrel describes ME1 insanity play.

Yes, but your mates would usually shoot them before using their powers or allow you to, making them activate it, though flying throug the air stopped them from being too much of an annoyance.

[Chromie]

I want a perma-death mode.

[Double_02]

Personally, I like to start on normal and work my way up, but I think I'll just start on Veteran in ME3. Don't want too much of a challenge the first time through. I want to soak in the story, game mechanics, etc, first time through.

I will admit, insanity was quite enjoyable.

[Yezdigerd]

Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...

I think this is a general problem with RPG games - I wouldn't say it makes them unplayable, but any game with some kind of crowd control or enemy-disabling ability is going to have wonky difficulty issues.

Compare Dragon Age: Origins - once you got enough of the good crowd-control spells, very few enemies remained authentically challenging. It only got tricky if you were fighting more enemies than you had crowd-control abilities for, if you were fighting them in enclosed spaces that let them get hits in before you had time to hit them with debuffs, or if they had crowd-control abilities of their own.

Well it can be done, just not by Bioware it seems. Baldurs gate had the same problem with cheap dot aoe spells which the enemy didn't move out of beyond fog of war. Yet various mods, most notable Sword Coast Strategem assigned the enemy ai much better scripts. No cheating involved, just good understanding of combat mechanics with the modder. Enemies becomes scary challenging, something the games difficulty levels didn't accomplish.

I really think it would be much better to make a good AI and then scale down damage and health for the easier difficulty settings, rather then scaling them up for the harder.

[JeffZero]

Ringo12 wrote...

I want a perma-death mode.

Fire Effect: Emblem no Densetsu Mass