Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...
Whoa, you mean sort of a high-power low-resource mechanic that rewards careful planning and thinking in terms of the entire mission? Yeah, don't want anything like that getting into the game. Cooldown for the cooldown god! Spam for the spam throne!
Mi-Chan wrote...
Random citizen wrote...
Anyone know when this little idea actually found its way into the lore?
As far as I'm aware, it was the books.
In addition to that, alliance biotics were on a 4500 calorie diet, and they were given a high-energy drink after biotic training - so it's very taxing on the body and metabolic rate. So unless you eat well before you go on a mission, and possibly during - you'll run out of juice.
Mi-Chan wrote...
Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...
Whoa, you mean sort of a high-power low-resource mechanic that rewards careful planning and thinking in terms of the entire mission? Yeah, don't want anything like that getting into the game. Cooldown for the cooldown god! Spam for the spam throne!
Like I mentioned before, I don't give a damn if the gameplay screws over the lore, as long as I'm having a good time.
Guest_Calinstel_*
Mi-Chan wrote...
Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...
Whoa, you mean sort of a high-power low-resource mechanic that rewards careful planning and thinking in terms of the entire mission? Yeah, don't want anything like that getting into the game. Cooldown for the cooldown god! Spam for the spam throne!
Like I mentioned before, I don't give a damn if the gameplay screws over the lore, as long as I'm having a good time.
Terror_K wrote...
Yeah, well... most of the time in ME2 where "gameplay screws over the lore" I personally wasn't having a good time.
didymos1120 wrote...
Terror_K wrote...
Yeah, well... most of the time in ME2 where "gameplay screws over the lore" I personally wasn't having a good time.
But apparently you were when ME1 was doing it.
Modifié par Terror_K, 26 décembre 2011 - 07:46 .
Guest_Arcian_*
In my opinion: If it makes the gameplay better, then Yes, every time.Terror_K wrote...
What it basically comes down to is this... one simple question: Are any changes made for the gameplay good enough reasons to warrant the retcon/inconsistency?
InvincibleHero wrote...
The amps are sub-dermally implanted. Apparently eezo nodes implanted in biotics give them the ability to generate ME filed by the electrical signals from the nervous system. .... reasonable to assume they have to draw power from something as they cannot have an infinite power source. Would they really want implants put in and out every so many as the power is exhausted? That seems unreliable so maybe power is beamed wirelessly into the nodes and implants.
Modifié par someone else, 26 décembre 2011 - 03:26 .
Mi-Chan wrote...
Dave Exclamation Mark Yognaut wrote...
Whoa, you mean sort of a high-power low-resource mechanic that rewards careful planning and thinking in terms of the entire mission? Yeah, don't want anything like that getting into the game. Cooldown for the cooldown god! Spam for the spam throne!
Like I mentioned before, I don't give a damn if the gameplay screws over the lore, as long as I'm having a good time.
Arcian wrote...
Terror_K, you would do your credibility a service if you could stop sounding like a whiner all the time. Also, sitting on that high horse looking down on the rest of us with contempt? It needs to go.
That said, some of your concerns are justified, even if only partially.
Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 26 décembre 2011 - 03:24 .
Random citizen wrote...
To some people, "gameplay screwing over the lore" negates the possibilities of having a good time. Thats why you need to have good gameplay that does not. Then everyone (well..) is happy.
Let's not become hostile in this thread and let it be a civilized discussion instead. 
Mi-Chan wrote...
Random citizen wrote...
To some people, "gameplay screwing over the lore" negates the possibilities of having a good time. Thats why you need to have good gameplay that does not. Then everyone (well..) is happy.
Another thing worth noting is that you can't really please everyone. Some people prefer lore over gameplay.
Some gameplay over lore. I personally prefer not having to move out of the way when hit by a warp (ducking into cover is much more convenient), Not to die the nano-second my shields drop, not go into a coma when I overdose on Medigel (I use it a LOT.), and I like being able to use my biotics more than two or three times during a mission. All weapons also have auto-targetting lore-wise, so you should be able to point it in the general direction of the enemy, wait a few seconds and then unload for great justice.
This is the game when based around the lore, for good or bad.
When based around game mechanics, warp deals damage instead of permanently ripping stuff apart in a specific spot (See; Mass Effect: Retribution), I prefer using Singularity to hold enemies and biotic combos rather than it engulfing the person it hits, I prefer having to aim the gun manually and use my own skill to win battles and so on.
This is entirely subjective, and I won't try to convince anyone to agree with me, and I respect their viewpoints.
It's like apples and oranges. You might firmly believe that apples taste better, so when I try to convince you that oranges taste better because I think so, well... I won't have much luck doing so.
Modifié par Random citizen, 26 décembre 2011 - 07:51 .
Guest_lightsnow13_*
Someone With Mass wrote...
Let's face it. ME1's gameplay was far from perfect (In my opinion, it was the weakest feature in the game that always kept me from playing it because the gameplay was so broken and boring) and I think they corrected a lot of those mistakes in ME2 and I am also happy that they're keeping that tone for ME3, which will more than likely allow for smoother gameplay.
If I don't have fun during the 70% percent of the game (I can easily finish ME1 in about 6 hours if I'm not doing the side missions, which mostly involves shooting things), I'm probably not going to feel motivated to return to that game.
lightsnow13 wrote...
Someone With Mass wrote...
Let's face it. ME1's gameplay was far from perfect (In my opinion, it was the weakest feature in the game that always kept me from playing it because the gameplay was so broken and boring) and I think they corrected a lot of those mistakes in ME2 and I am also happy that they're keeping that tone for ME3, which will more than likely allow for smoother gameplay.
If I don't have fun during the 70% percent of the game (I can easily finish ME1 in about 6 hours if I'm not doing the side missions, which mostly involves shooting things), I'm probably not going to feel motivated to return to that game.
This is exactly my thinking too. ME1 was horrendous. No exceptions. Everything about the game was just awful. Whenever I go back to play it (to create another shepard - although now I have all the shepards I need...so I'll probably never play it again) I always find it irritating. It's so broken. Just point in the general direction and shoot. If you have heat dampeners on your weapons, that's even better. Broken pistol ftw much?
ME2 far surpassed ME1 in gameplay. Abilities actually matter in ME2. In ME1 it was basically spam your abilities - don't forget to level them up so they do a small inth of a difference - and boom! You'll win the fight! In ME2, one leveled up ability drastically changed it. Sometimes even providing a smaller effect. Eventually you can level it up so you can choose between 2 different types of that ability.
Idk, people who like ME1...can't seem to accept that ME2 had better gameplay. It's like they'd be betraying all their memories of playing ME1. I'm not saying ME2 had better dialogue (although, I do think that. ME1 had repeated lines for quite a few of the paragon/renegade answers). But it certainly had better combat.
Random citizen wrote...
Why would you need to move ”out of the way” when hit by a warp? Does ducking into cover go against lore? Then its poor lore indeed. Do lore demand you die when shields go down? Is the armor good for nothing? (of course unarmored targets should generally go down with one shot.
Its not about apples or oranges, its about how to bake an "apple and orange pie" without buring it in the oven or making either the apples or oranges taste bad. Some people might not like an apple-and-orange pie, but that is what you get if you treat the elements you have seriously. Mass effect was hardly concieved as primarly a shooter. I hope I have not come across as hostile.
My intention is mearly to inform you of what I have come to learn and understand. No its not the final word on these things, but I do find lots of developers trapped in an unfortunate paradigm based on, from my perspective, dated understanding and practices.
Mi-Chan wrote...
Random citizen wrote...
Why would you need to move ”out of the way” when hit by a warp? Does ducking into cover go against lore? Then its poor lore indeed. Do lore demand you die when shields go down? Is the armor good for nothing? (of course unarmored targets should generally go down with one shot.
This is taken from the Mass Effect Retribution Novel, so I assume this is how Warp works in the lore.
"Grayson fired the pistols several times, keeping Anderson pinned down. And then Anderson wasrocked again by another biotic attack. This time instead of a simple push to send him reeling, his enemycreated a series of microscopic, rapidly shifting mass effect fields that completely surrounded him. Theyflickered in and out of existence, subtly warping the very fabric of the space-time continuum. Thepowerful push and pull of the opposing forces tore at his flesh, causing him to scream in pain.It felt like he was being ripped apart at the subatomic level. Anderson knew if he didn’t get out of theshifting fields, they’d cause all the cells in his body to hemorrhage and rupture." <-- Move out of the way or sh*t hits the fan.Its not about apples or oranges, its about how to bake an "apple and orange pie" without buring it in the oven or making either the apples or oranges taste bad. Some people might not like an apple-and-orange pie, but that is what you get if you treat the elements you have seriously. Mass effect was hardly concieved as primarly a shooter. I hope I have not come across as hostile.
My intention is mearly to inform you of what I have come to learn and understand. No its not the final word on these things, but I do find lots of developers trapped in an unfortunate paradigm based on, from my perspective, dated understanding and practices.
I was simply making an analogy where the apples would refer to gameplay and the oranges would refer to the lore. People will naturally prefer one over the other, and we can't change that. The best thing to do would be a best of both worlds scenario - but with an expansive world like Mass Effect, that's not too viable.
Suppressing options sure makes better gameplay...lightsnow13 wrote...
, people who like ME1...can't seem to accept that ME2 had better gameplay. It's like they'd be betraying all their memories of playing ME1. I'm not saying ME2 had better dialogue (although, I do think that. ME1 had repeated lines for quite a few of the paragon/renegade answers). But it certainly had better combat.
Retour en haut