194 réponses à ce sujet

[Stalker]

Ghost Lightning wrote...

You guys are just trying to be badasses. The collector ship on Insanity is the hardest sh!t I ever played.

... and I think that's exactly what they are aiming for.
The collectors ship was just hard because collectors move around your cover or (the Harbinger) shoot you out of it. From the gameplay I have seen, every enemy in Mass Effect 3 is about to be able to do that. And that's the origin of the phrase "insanity is the new normal".

I don't really think you die when you get 3 shots, like you did in ME2 on insanity. That would just be pathetic. What if you would want to play ME3 on insanity then...? That would be near the impossible.

Modifié par Mr Massakka, 30 décembre 2011 - 01:57 .

[naledgeborn]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Being Soldier class, with the GPS, Mattock and Widow, made insanity easy. Especially when you add AR.

Weakling. LOL. Revenant, Katana, Mantis, Carnifex. No bonus power. I give all that DLC crap to squadmates and non-soldier Sheps.

[MrDizazta]

Ghost Lightning wrote...

You guys are just trying to be badasses. The collector ship on Insanity is the hardest sh!t I ever played.

You serious? I thought insanity on the collector ship was a cake walk. In fact the only enemy I ever had trouble with are those damn Praetorians for always targeting me and never going for my allies.

Modifié par MrDizaztar, 30 décembre 2011 - 02:14 .

[Eclipse_9990]

rolson00 wrote...

link

bioware please tell me the first part is rubbish:(

Whatever you thought about Shepard being the one true hero is going
to be squandered once you start Mass Effect 3. BioWare announced that
the game will be a lot more challenging than previous installments, and
it very well may be due to the added push for online co-op.
According to Shacknews,
ME3 will probably ask more from players in order to ensure how
rage-inducing it will be for those playing alone. BioWare stated that “Veteran difficulty from Mass Effect 1 and 2 will be on par with normal difficulty in Mass Effect 3.”
That doesn’t make it easy for completionists who are used to single-player mode though. Getting a good “Readiness Rating” will better your odds for a “good” ending, by which having another player there to help you out could make it easier for you.
This kind of difficulty spike should be something that’s adjusted for
however you choose to play, not be the bottom line, as it’s quickly
becoming for more and more games as of late. But come March, Shepard is
going to need some help, unless you’ve been madly playing Veteran this
whole time.

Holy crap thats awesome. 

[SNascimento]

One can beat Mass Effect 2 fairly easy, but that doesn't mean much. That is because most of the game you can just say away from the battle poping up from cover and shooting. Enemies won't flank you at you will eventually kill them all.
.
It was easy, but there was barely any skill involved.
.
So I just like to say ME2 is a game with good gameplay that let you use your skill to play with finesse.

[looloolooigotsomeapples]

That makes absolutely no sense. You can get the resources without Multiplayer, and aside from likely hyperbole with "normal is the new veteran", the difficulty spike isn't the bottom line. You can turn down the difficulty, do story mode, etc.

There's no real room for complaint here.

[robarcool]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Arrival on Insanity was a challenge, though.

With infiltrator, no and with soldier, it was a cakewalk lol! But, I know you don't play soldier, so what can I say!

[crimzontearz]

I will never touch online Co op......ever.....I will happily spend money on a guide to know exactly what to do to get the best possible ending solo before I do that

its BS like this that make games like skrim with its dull story and deus ex with its broken system and hypocritical situations sound like good alternatives to the final chapter of what is supposed to be my favorite serie

[daftPirate]

crimzontearz wrote...

I will never touch online Co op......ever.....I will happily spend money on a guide to know exactly what to do to get the best possible ending solo before I do that

its BS like this that make games like skrim with its dull story and deus ex with its broken system and hypocritical situations sound like good alternatives to the final chapter of what is supposed to be my favorite serie

Earnest question: What is so evil about co-op that inspires this sentiment in people? I understand that it requires more resources to implement, but at the same time, more were spent on this entry in the series as a whole. Why is it so offensive?

[goofyomnivore]

Yeah that YMIR at the end seemed to never reload/reheat it was firing away like a boss.

[crimzontearz]

daftPirate wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
I will never touch online Co op......ever.....I will happily spend money on a guide to know exactly what to do to get the best possible ending solo before I do that

its BS like this that make games like skrim with its dull story and deus ex with its broken system and hypocritical situations sound like good alternatives to the final chapter of what is supposed to be my favorite serie

Earnest question: What is so evil about co-op that inspires this sentiment in people? I understand that it requires more resources to implement, but at the same time, more were spent on this entry in the series as a whole. Why is it so offensive?

it's the push for it that is offensive. It's the lame excuse that it is needed for sales when games like skyrim prove that such gimmiks are not needed to pull in great scores and amazing revenue

if I want to play GOW I'll play that. Those resources, manpower and development time could have been used to improve the important part of the game.....the SP

[Destroy Raiden_]

They already said you don't have to play co op or mp in order to beat the game by that already mp or co op will effect places you can or can't access in the game or it could even effect how many mooks you have to kill say you need to stop the reapers from taking over section 8 you failed to do so in mp or co op so load up your single player game and now you've got hordes more of reaper mooks to kill then you should've if you didn't play mp or co op.

Also the game being challenging isn't a bad thing this game needs some challenge beyond the whole find chest high wall seek cover or be a bad ass or nice guy win the argument. Really 2's hand holding was on par with fables I wouldn't mind my game kicking my ass and making me work for and try hard to win it.

[Mr. C]

Ghost Lightning wrote...

You guys are just trying to be badasses. The collector ship on Insanity is the hardest sh!t I ever played.

Agreed, though this was really the only time it seemed "insane." I was a bit worried about the derelict Reaper, as it's usually the most annoying part of the game imo, but bringing Grunt and Jack made it retardedly easy :/


Related to topic though:  The increase in difficulty makes sense, as the Reaper invasion has been a literal extinction-level event for time immemorial. I understand that gameplay generally takes precidence over lore in most circumstances, but it's a good decision on Bioware's part.

[nitefyre410]

crimzontearz wrote...

daftPirate wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
I will never touch online Co op......ever.....I will happily spend money on a guide to know exactly what to do to get the best possible ending solo before I do that

its BS like this that make games like skrim with its dull story and deus ex with its broken system and hypocritical situations sound like good alternatives to the final chapter of what is supposed to be my favorite serie

Earnest question: What is so evil about co-op that inspires this sentiment in people? I understand that it requires more resources to implement, but at the same time, more were spent on this entry in the series as a whole. Why is it so offensive?

it's the push for it that is offensive. It's the lame excuse that it is needed for sales when games like skyrim prove that such gimmiks are not needed to pull in great scores and amazing revenue

if I want to play GOW I'll play that. Those resources, manpower and development time could have been used to improve the important part of the game.....the SP

 

I can understand  this stand point I  really hell  I even respect ... I want to play Co-op Multiplayer because its something fun to with my friends not because its somehow makes  and easier for me to best ending that in the Single player companion.


They should have followed the  Borderlands model... that  game was huge sucess and hella fun to play with or with out  friends. Even the Kindom  Hearts Birht By Sleep multiplayer  would a have been goods,  Extra missions  and challenges that you can do with your friends by not required..

The more  I hear  about Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer the more I don't like this  Galactic Readiness.

[Zanallen]

nitefyre410 wrote...

I can understand  this stand point I  really hell  I even respect ... I want to play Co-op Multiplayer because its something fun to with my friends not because its somehow makes  and easier for me to best ending that in the Single player companion.

They should have followed the  Borderlands model... that  game was huge sucess and hella fun to play with or with out  friends. Even the Kindom  Hearts Birht By Sleep multiplayer  would a have been goods,  Extra missions  and challenges that you can do with your friends by not required..

The more  I hear  about Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer the more I don't like this  Galactic Readiness.

But it isn't required. There is nothing required about it. You can do it if you want, but you don't have to. The MP can effect your SP campaign. but only if you want to. You can achieve everything in the SP campaign without ever touching the MP.

[daftPirate]

crimzontearz wrote...

daftPirate wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
I will never touch online Co op......ever.....I will happily spend money on a guide to know exactly what to do to get the best possible ending solo before I do that

its BS like this that make games like skrim with its dull story and deus ex with its broken system and hypocritical situations sound like good alternatives to the final chapter of what is supposed to be my favorite serie

Earnest question: What is so evil about co-op that inspires this sentiment in people? I understand that it requires more resources to implement, but at the same time, more were spent on this entry in the series as a whole. Why is it so offensive?

it's the push for it that is offensive. It's the lame excuse that it is needed for sales when games like skyrim prove that such gimmiks are not needed to pull in great scores and amazing revenue

if I want to play GOW I'll play that. Those resources, manpower and development time could have been used to improve the important part of the game.....the SP

 

Ok, I guess I see reason in that, as a matter of principle. It does have it's own little appeal for me, though. After me, and my friends, have played and enjoyed ME1 and 2, it'll be cool to all be part of the same universe for the first time. I'm less excited about the prospect of mutiplayer than that of ME3 with other, real people, friends in particular.

[ediskrad327]

nitefyre410 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

daftPirate wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
I will never touch online Co op......ever.....I will happily spend money on a guide to know exactly what to do to get the best possible ending solo before I do that

its BS like this that make games like skrim with its dull story and deus ex with its broken system and hypocritical situations sound like good alternatives to the final chapter of what is supposed to be my favorite serie

Earnest question: What is so evil about co-op that inspires this sentiment in people? I understand that it requires more resources to implement, but at the same time, more were spent on this entry in the series as a whole. Why is it so offensive?

it's the push for it that is offensive. It's the lame excuse that it is needed for sales when games like skyrim prove that such gimmiks are not needed to pull in great scores and amazing revenue

if I want to play GOW I'll play that. Those resources, manpower and development time could have been used to improve the important part of the game.....the SP

 

I can understand  this stand point I  really hell  I even respect ... I want to play Co-op Multiplayer because its something fun to with my friends not because its somehow makes  and easier for me to best ending that in the Single player companion.


They should have followed the  Borderlands model... that  game was huge sucess and hella fun to play with or with out  friends. Even the Kindom  Hearts Birht By Sleep multiplayer  would a have been goods,  Extra missions  and challenges that you can do with your friends by not required..

The more  I hear  about Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer the more I don't like this  Galactic Readiness.

the multiplayer is just an alternative for war resuorces, you can gain them also without EVER playing MP

Modifié par ediskrad327, 30 décembre 2011 - 03:18 .

[nitefyre410]

[quote]Zanallen wrote...

[quote]nitefyre410 wrote...

I can understand  this stand point I  really hell  I even respect ... I want to play Co-op Multiplayer because its something fun to with my friends not because its somehow makes  and easier for me to best ending that in the Single player companion.

They should have followed the  Borderlands model... that  game was huge sucess and hella fun to play with or with out  friends. Even the Kindom  Hearts Birht By Sleep multiplayer  would a have been goods,  Extra missions  and challenges that you can do with your friends by not required..

The more  I hear  about Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer the more I don't like this  Galactic Readiness.

[/quote]

But it isn't required. There is nothing required about it. You can do it if you want, but you don't have to. The MP can effect your SP campaign. but only if you want to. You can achieve everything in the SP campaign without ever touching the MP.

[/quote] 

I'm not saying that it is but the Galactic  Readiness ... sounds like your  penalizing   people in the single player campaign  for not playing  MP  and they have not explained it very well at all.. 

Can effect is absolutely right.. can effect but in what way.

[qoute] the multiplayer is just an alternative for war resuorces, you can gain them also without EVER playing MP [/quote]

what are  these war resources, how do they effect the game SP and MP...  I know  you don't have to play the damn multplayer  to play  single player.    There has been  very little to know infromation on how  this works even the basic  details...

Thats my point of contention... NOT the fact there is co-op.  

Modifié par nitefyre410, 30 décembre 2011 - 03:32 .

[Zanallen]

nitefyre410 wrote...

I'm not saying that it is but the Galactic  Readiness ... sounds like your  penalizing   people in the single player campaign  for not playing  MP  and they have not explained it very well at all.. 

Can effect is absolutely right.. can effect but in what way.

to what effect, positive or negative....  If going off  of what they say about the Galactic Readiness it sounds like not playing Multplayer..may have a negative effect. 

From what I have read, it sounds like you can use the MP to suppliment your SP campaign. Take ME2 for example, in order to get the best possible outcome you needed to fully upgrade your ship, do the loyalty missions and make the right choices. If ME2 had MP, you could substitute the ship uypgrades or maybe even a few of the loyalty missions with resources from the co-op.