429 réponses à ce sujet

[Yuoaman]

AlanC9 wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Alan: Yeah, well it doesn't make much sense to fault Biowares balance for breaking down past the midgame... it's a really delicate balance that very few RPGs succeed at.

But it's relevant here, since ME2 does better at this than ME1 does. Much better.

Partly because ME1 fails so badly, of course. Edit: fails at this aspect of balance, I mean; I don't want to sound like ME1 combat was a total failure.

True, in ME1 at about the two-thirds point there's almost no challenge anymore, and you can one-shot most of the basic mooks.

[CroGamer002]

ME1 gameplay is junk.

[tetrisblock4x1]

AlanC9 wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Alan: Yeah, well it doesn't make much sense to fault Biowares balance for breaking down past the midgame... it's a really delicate balance that very few RPGs succeed at.

But it's relevant here, since ME2 does better at this than ME1 does. Much better.

Partly because ME1 fails so badly, of course. Edit: fails at this aspect of balance, I mean; I don't want to sound like ME1 combat was a total failure.

But until that point it was one tough shooter... can't make too many mistakes on the levelling screen until you leve into the uper teens to low 20's... it took me that long to rescue Liara and kill the Asari commandos on Noveria. The second half of the game passed by a lot faster than the first.

[Il Divo]

One aspect (for me) is that ME1's combat felt a little too clean. Aside from the shotgun, ME1's gameplay never felt quite as visceral. Playing ME2 right now, much of the gameplay is more brutal (Vanguard charges, general gun mechanics, melee, etc).

[Epsilon330]

One of the many gameplay issues with 1 for me was sprinting. Out of combat, it did nothing but zoom the camera. In combat? It was as if someone had pressed a "Ludicrous speed" button on Shepard. In Layman's terms: It either didn't do a thing, or did too much.
Not to mention the sprinting "animation" made Shep look constipated.

[SNascimento]

Because it's much better.

[AlanC9]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Partly because ME1 fails so badly, of course. Edit: fails at this aspect of balance, I mean; I don't want to sound like ME1 combat was a total failure.

But until that point it was one tough shooter... can't make too many mistakes on the levelling screen until you leve into the uper teens to low 20's... it took me that long to rescue Liara and kill the Asari commandos on Noveria. The second half of the game passed by a lot faster than the first.

You sure we played the same ME1?

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 janvier 2012 - 05:48 .

[D.Kain]

I do not prefer ME2 gameplay, I just prefer new faster engine. Gameplay wise ME1 was better IMO. All I like about ME2 is the better cover system and faster gameplay, better graphics in general. Everything else ME1 had better imo, inventory, more skills, better powers, no protections system other than shields, that didn't get in the way of powers, no shared cooldowns.
So for me the best gameplay would be the better graphics and faster engine of ME2, stuff like curving biotic + everything else from ME1 and improved.

Imo a lot of people do confuse better graphics and faster gameplay with how things work in ME2/ME1, those are different things. We can have faster engine AND gameplay from ME1, would look the same just would WORK different.

Modifié par D.Kain, 27 janvier 2012 - 05:51 .

[TexasToast712]

 Because the combat is more refined and challenging in ME2. When you get the right gear in ME1 everything becomes a cakewalk spam fest with no degree of challenge.

[tetrisblock4x1]

AlanC9 wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Partly because ME1 fails so badly, of course. Edit: fails at this aspect of balance, I mean; I don't want to sound like ME1 combat was a total failure.

But until that point it was one tough shooter... can't make too many mistakes on the levelling screen until you leve into the uper teens to low 20's... it took me that long to rescue Liara and kill the Asari commandos on Noveria. The second half of the game passed by a lot faster than the first.

You sure we played the same ME1?

Yeah, I just ignored the side content until the second half of the game because I wanted a challenge. I left the side content until after the difficulty got trivial.

[Yuoaman]

The only times I ever had trouble in ME1 were the krogan battlemaster at the end of recruiting Liara - because I usually go there right away - and the Pinnacle Station stuff.

[AlanC9]

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

tetrisblock4x1 wrote...

Partly because ME1 fails so badly, of course. Edit: fails at this aspect of balance, I mean; I don't want to sound like ME1 combat was a total failure.

But until that point it was one tough shooter... can't make too many mistakes on the levelling screen until you leve into the uper teens to low 20's... it took me that long to rescue Liara and kill the Asari commandos on Noveria. The second half of the game passed by a lot faster than the first.

You sure we played the same ME1?

Yeah, I just ignored the side content until the second half of the game because I wanted a challenge. I left the side content until after the difficulty got trivial.

I always avoid most of  the side content altogether, so I imagine we were playing at similar character levels.

I also don't see how anyone could actually make a mistake on the ME1 levelling screen if he understands what the powers do.

Though Yuoaman's right -- that Krogan battlemaster can be tough on Insanity, since with Immunity up he's very hard to damage and if you get Liara first you won't be able to keep him consistently stunlocked.

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 janvier 2012 - 05:58 .

[JeffZero]

The beginning of ME1 wasn't 'tough'. It was just annoying. Look, I'm all for realism in certain applications -- I love Bushido Blade and I generally don't even like fighting games. But the 'you get hit once by the right kind of gun and you're dead' issues with early ME1 were just signs of improper balancing.

The game's curve is basically the top of a skyscraper and a fall from its roof. Endgame is absolutely pathetic -- even on Insanity there are enough ways to undermine the utterly-annoying Immunity spam of your foes and they stop hurting you a long time before that.

Compare this to ME2 where the curve actually feels appropriate and I've got all the reason I need to take a deep breath when Shepard gets to Lazarus Station.

[mango smoothie]

ME1 gameplay was slow, boring, clunky, and had so many problems. ME2 gameplay was fast, fun, smooth, and made me constantly think tactically.

[Yuoaman]

JeffZero wrote...

The beginning of ME1 wasn't 'tough'. It was just annoying. Look, I'm all for realism in certain applications -- I love Bushido Blade and I generally don't even like fighting games. But the 'you get hit once by the right kind of gun and you're dead' issues with early ME1 were just signs of improper balancing.

The game's curve is basically the top of a skyscraper and a fall from its roof. Endgame is absolutely pathetic -- even on Insanity there are enough ways to undermine the utterly-annoying Immunity spam of your foes and they stop hurting you a long time before that.

Compare this to ME2 where the curve actually feels appropriate and I've got all the reason I need to take a deep breath when Shepard gets to Lazarus Station.

Yeah, it's just ridiculously hard to inflict the kind of damage that you're being dealt early on.

[CrazyRah]

I just prefer it because it is better.

[tetrisblock4x1]

All the more reason to focus down the most convienient enemy with biotics and tech. And not all of them have immunity at the same time, and it wears out quickly... so just focus on whoever is vulnerable and get back to the bullet sponge target when he's weakened.

[AlanC9]

Sure. It's not like any of us here couldn't beat ME1 on any difficulty level.

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 janvier 2012 - 06:03 .

[ediskrad327]

because it's funner

[SNascimento]

mango smoothie wrote...

ME1 gameplay was slow, boring, clunky, and had so many problems. ME2 gameplay was fast, fun, smooth, and made me constantly think tactically.

.
This.

[D.Kain]

SNascimento wrote...

mango smoothie wrote...

ME1 gameplay was slow, boring, clunky, and had so many problems. ME2 gameplay was fast, fun, smooth, and made me constantly think tactically.

.
This.

Which you do not get the point at all. Faster =/= new mechanics. It could be ME1 gameplay with ME2 speed and graphics, that would be the same fun, just would work like ME1.

[DayusMakhina]

AlanC9 wrote...

Sure. It's not like any of us here couldn't beat ME1 on any difficulty level.

Haha yeh. As much as I loved ME1 the combat in it was a total bore for me. Was just a trivial affair with absolutely no difficulty at all, an that generally doesn't fly well with me considering i'm part of the shooter crowd. Generally speaking I consider gameplay to be bad if there's no challenge in it.

[SNascimento]

D.Kain wrote...

SNascimento wrote...

mango smoothie wrote...

ME1 gameplay was slow, boring, clunky, and had so many problems. ME2 gameplay was fast, fun, smooth, and made me constantly think tactically.

.
This.

Which you do not get the point at all. Faster =/= new mechanics. It could be ME1 gameplay with ME2 speed and graphics, that would be the same fun, just would work like ME1.

.
If it was like ME1, it would be slow, boring, clunky and would have a lot of problems. 

[D.Kain]

SNascimento wrote...

D.Kain wrote...

SNascimento wrote...

mango smoothie wrote...

ME1 gameplay was slow, boring, clunky, and had so many problems. ME2 gameplay was fast, fun, smooth, and made me constantly think tactically.

.
This.

Which you do not get the point at all. Faster =/= new mechanics. It could be ME1 gameplay with ME2 speed and graphics, that would be the same fun, just would work like ME1.

.
If it was like ME1, it would be slow, boring, clunky and would have a lot of problems. 

Noo.. It would be fast and not clunky and fun like ME2 BUT there would be more powers, not shared cooldowns, no ammo clips, inventory, no protection system, etc, etc.