Little fence of text below.Arijharn wrote...
I think I see where Terror_K is coming from in regards to the whole 'Action RPG' system in regards to ME2 but I think what they did was more 'streamline' the system as opposed to 'dumbing down.' In ME1 for example you had something like 15-20 pips for Assault rifle which unlocks progressively more powerful 'power-ups' whereas ME2 just had four slot dumps etc to unlock. To me; the difference was superior in terms of a more immediate impact in gameplay (unless you're someone who can actually tell the difference between an increased accuracy or firepower of .1% each stack etc) for ME2 because the reward was more 'in your face.'
Yes, differences were more graphical and obvious, but were they better? Let’s think (or look like we thinking
) – we have 29 y.o. Lieutenant-Commander, who have just couple of “ticks” in skills and at the same time he is N7 uber-kommando, wielding some pea-shooter with accuracy range in “minutes of screen”? If that is Alliance top-secret supplies, than Alliance is done for, I call shotgun on first life boat from it, move to another end of galaxy and I want my “outdated” “place_your_service_firearm_here” (AK/M16/M14/Mosin) back!
Maybe they are “greatly inferior” to “space age” weapons, but at least their outdated bullets flies where you aiming, not just “some way over there”.
I understand it’s just game and they follow standard gaming procedure – we starting from space rats and space daggers (only if ranged, not melee) and ending with space dragons and space great swords of total overkill:)., but c’mon, how ‘bout common sense? IMHO if our Shepard had about 20-30% of total available skillpoints ready to distribution at very beginning and some decent gear, grade III or IV that would be much more realistic. Partially ME2 corrected that IF you imported 50-60lvl Shepard, but that’s slightly not the same.
Plus, what I totally dislike in sequels, especially with some serious changes in game mechanics, it’s how our PC “forgets” everything. Gothic, Witcher, ME – all suffer from this “simplification”. If memory serves, only Alpha protocol had “premade” template for character, “Veteran” or something.
Arijharn wrote...
The problem with ME1 was that it looked like a shooter but didn't perform like a shooter, and I think it was irritating to point my crosshair's over something and still not hit because of some random (hidden) chaotic element that ruled that the shot lay outside my percentage to hit, and thus, completely out of my control.
Strange. My experience with ME1 decent guns (accuracy rating 30 and higher) and proper Shepard’s skills tells me otherwise. More than that – all misses I scored are my and only my fault, not weapon's. First shot went exactly where it was aimed (if target was small enough to fit into “crosshairs” (circlehairs, to be more correct
)). With high-end weapons, from Master or Rosenkov range, weapon POI was practically equal to POA. That is one of reasons of my dislike to ME2 weapons, with “inherently” inaccurate guns like Avenger or Revenant with their accuracy somewhere within “minutes of broad side of barn”, if you lucky. Add reduced projectiles velocities, and in pure result all I got was huge amount of misses, even under Adrenalin Rush effect, even in short range. Not pointblank, but somewhere around 10-20 metres. For my first ME2 playthrough I had that “WTF Jokerface”
during most of combats and accepted new weapon model with not pinch, but heap of salt. Still hate it. Probably one of few things in ME2 I really hate. Not some pet peeves, but major psychotic hatred.
Arijharn wrote...
I will grant though that ME2 didn't have enough choice though (I missed carnage terribly for example, because that was unique, it wasn't something like: 'For 30 seconds you generate no heat' which was badly designed in my opinion because it was an effect that could be duplicated by gear etc) or worse it had some strange design decisions like you could only unlock medium armour if you put enough points into pistols (for a loose example).
If memory serves, weapon progress opened weapons only. Armor opens armor. But I understand what you mean, at least I hope so.
IMHO ME1 had typical RPG “skill-tree”, when ME2 had “skill-log (or trunk)”, with 1-2 branches.
Referring to “no overheat” skills – they were neutralized only by high-end mods and only until some enemy will use overheating skill on you. So, as counters to enemy abilities they were good. Regardless, I trained those skills for accuracy increase mostly, not for skillls. However, ME2 removed most of those abilities entirely.
I can’t say that one system is inferior or superior to another – they just too different. One and only thing I do not understand completely – is “Speech” skill, no matter how it is named. If Shepard is really some great leader, whose fire made others follow him into hell, than why all that “charm/intimidate” skills fuss?
Arijharn wrote...
The only thing I really missed from ME1 for ME2 was weapon customization like Ramjets etc, etc, but it seems like that is being put back into ME3, although ammo mods are still class mods for some baffling (and completely arbitrary) reason imo.
Agree completely. Lab-mods were too… artificial (or alien (not to poke other space species)). Minor lab-mods like 5-10% could be Ok, like custom gunsmithing, but 50% is too much. Better create proper weapon from start or use grade system from ME1.
Plus, what I really hate and consider total failure – is thermal clip system. Starting with inconsistencies like “they are universal, but you have separate amount of them for different weapon” and ending with everspawning clips in many hard fights. Final slap – those “10% ammo increase” pouches. They were bugged and 10% were given rounded down. 1 extra round for Carnifex – just to put final bullet into your own temple.
Modifié par Rudy Lis, 25 janvier 2012 - 01:03 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
