246 réponses à ce sujet

[John Locke N7]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

The OP is just trolling living in nostalgiaville trying to pretend ME 1 is a better game when in reality ME 2 was 10 times better than ME 1.

nostalgia applys i havnt played ME1 in a long time. ive replayed that game recently, ive replayed that game MENY times and each time its fun.

EVERY TIME i try to replay ME2, the combat gets in the way of me being able to stand playing it. and i have to stop.

i always thought "troll" ment someone who got off on contraditory statements. I THINK i have a legit arguement.

Modifié par John Locke N7, 08 février 2012 - 06:29 .

[neubourn]

As if anybody used guns other then the Spectre Master Gear in ME1 once they could afford em. "Oh theres 200+ guns, but im only gonna use 4"

[Epic777]

John Locke N7 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

John Locke N7 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

NO SHOUTING! Tell that to the krogan battlemasters.....

im not here to debate immunity but...... it made them TANKS.

mass effect 1 had tanks, mages and rogues.........BECAUSE its talents and weapons.

ME3 looks like more of ME2.

 Now I am confused. If its the holy trilogy of RPG you refer to(tank, mage, rogue) then you still have me lost. ME1 had not thief/rogue class

engineers had enemy debuffs and 2 lock picking skills..... no back stab but the longest in ranged combat.
aka, space rogue =0

a rogue/thief class without backstab is like a mage without a pointy hat 

[ediskrad327]

so ME3 is going to stink becuase it has more guns that ME2?...whut?

[incinerator950]

MELTOR13 wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Melty, at this point I don't think it would matter, its like hitting a dead horse with a bomb.

I'm sleepy anyways, I just thought I'd throw the trolls a bone before I crash. 

I'm so bored I'm about to scream.

[John Locke N7]

neubourn wrote...

As if anybody used guns other then the Spectre Master Gear in ME1 once they could afford em. "Oh theres 200+ guns, but im only gonna use 4"

you had to level up to get those guns.

how is "im only gonna use 4 guns (your interpritation of ME1) " and arguement against "im only gona use 4 guns (the amount listed of guns in ME3)"?

[John Locke N7]

Epic777 wrote...

John Locke N7 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

John Locke N7 wrote...

Epic777 wrote...

NO SHOUTING! Tell that to the krogan battlemasters.....

im not here to debate immunity but...... it made them TANKS.

mass effect 1 had tanks, mages and rogues.........BECAUSE its talents and weapons.

ME3 looks like more of ME2.

 Now I am confused. If its the holy trilogy of RPG you refer to(tank, mage, rogue) then you still have me lost. ME1 had not thief/rogue class

engineers had enemy debuffs and 2 lock picking skills..... no back stab but the longest in ranged combat.
aka, space rogue =0

a rogue/thief class without backstab is like a mage without a pointy hat 

mass effect 2 biotic is like a mage with no magic......

[Omega-202]

John Locke N7 wrote...

i kinda like getting better weapons by looting them.... sure mass effect 1 wasnt perfect. but jesus ME2  was unaccetable. DINT EVEN HAVE STATS ON THE GUNS.

how are we gona come across new weapons in ME3? you think we'll beat a boss and loot them, or find them in a chest?

no. it'll be LEVEL 10 - Delta Labs. were the Rocket Launcher will make its first apearance....

me =

Looting your way to better weapons is absurd.  

You're Commander Shepard.  You're in command of the most advanced ship in the galaxy, leading a team responsible for saving all sentient life.  

YOU SHOULD NOT BE JUST PICKING UP WEAPONS OFF THE FLOOR!!!  If some random mook enemy could be carrying it, you should have access to it.  New weapons should come from rare prototype sources or weapons that are exceedingly rare.  The fact that you could kill a Geth in ME1 and have it drop a Hahne-Kedar Lancer made no sense.  It was absurd, illogical and honestly ruined the feel of the universe.  

[ediskrad327]

ME3 has more weapons than ME2 and they have stats so i don't see the problem

[John Locke N7]

Omega-202 wrote...

John Locke N7 wrote...

i kinda like getting better weapons by looting them.... sure mass effect 1 wasnt perfect. but jesus ME2  was unaccetable. DINT EVEN HAVE STATS ON THE GUNS.

how are we gona come across new weapons in ME3? you think we'll beat a boss and loot them, or find them in a chest?

no. it'll be LEVEL 10 - Delta Labs. were the Rocket Launcher will make its first apearance....

me =

Looting your way to better weapons is absurd.  

You're Commander Shepard.  You're in command of the most advanced ship in the galaxy, leading a team responsible for saving all sentient life.  

YOU SHOULD NOT BE JUST PICKING UP WEAPONS OFF THE FLOOR!!!  If some random mook enemy could be carrying it, you should have access to it.  New weapons should come from rare prototype sources or weapons that are exceedingly rare.  The fact that you could kill a Geth in ME1 and have it drop a Hahne-Kedar Lancer made no sense.  It was absurd, illogical and honestly ruined the feel of the universe.  

Thats like saying Diablo is a stupid game.

[KotorEffect3]

John Locke N7 wrote...

neubourn wrote...

As if anybody used guns other then the Spectre Master Gear in ME1 once they could afford em. "Oh theres 200+ guns, but im only gonna use 4"

you had to level up to get those guns.

how is "im only gonna use 4 guns (your interpritation of ME1) " and arguement against "im only gona use 4 guns (the amount listed of guns in ME3)"?

You could get the spectre master gear guns before half the game was over.  It was rediculously easy to make money in ME 1

[neubourn]

John Locke N7 wrote...

neubourn wrote...

As if anybody used guns other then the Spectre Master Gear in ME1 once they could afford em. "Oh theres 200+ guns, but im only gonna use 4"

you had to level up to get those guns.

how is "im only gonna use 4 guns (your interpritation of ME1) " and arguement against "im only gona use 4 guns (the amount listed of guns in ME3)"?

for starters...the guns in ME1 SUCKED, because the combat SUCKED. It was not balanced, and definitely not as polished as it couldve been. Also...as was already stated, there really were only a handful of guns in ME1, and the rest were simply recolors of the same models, with different names. 

ME2 had less guns, but they were more distinctive, both in appearance and ability. Different rate of fires, sound, damage. And ME3 includes all of THOSE guns, plus new ones...which is more than enough for a 3PS

[didymos1120]

ediskrad327 wrote...

so ME3 is going to stink becuase it has more guns that ME2?...whut?

From what I can gather, the problem is that the weapons will actually be different from one another and not tied to a level-based loot system.  Therefore, not a real RPG and therefore bad. Or something.

[Omega-202]

John Locke N7 wrote...

nostalgia applys i havnt played ME1 in a long time. ive replayed that game recently, ive replayed that game MENY times and each time its fun.

EVERY TIME i try to replay ME2, the combat gets in the way of me being able to stand playing it. and i have to stop.

i always thought "troll" ment someone who got off on contraditory statements. I THINK i have a legit arguement.

In your twisted opinion, you have a legitimate argument.  

In reality, people have objectively based ME2's combat to be superior by the criteria that state that it is more diverse, more challenging, more balanced and more tactical.  

ME1 was a spam-fest dominated by pistols, CC and Immunity/Barrier-spam.  You never needed to take cover.  You never needed to tactically apply powers.  You never needed to stop shooting.  

ME1 was the inferior game when it came to gameplay.  Anyone who agrees with you should just be playing ME2 on "casual" difficulty and be done with it.  

[didymos1120]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...


You could get the spectre master gear guns before half the game was over.  It was rediculously easy to make money in ME 1

Very true, once you got up in level you were getting thousands and thousands of dollars just for finding minerals.

The amount you got per enemy was pretty insane too.

[John Locke N7]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

John Locke N7 wrote...

neubourn wrote...

As if anybody used guns other then the Spectre Master Gear in ME1 once they could afford em. "Oh theres 200+ guns, but im only gonna use 4"

you had to level up to get those guns.

how is "im only gonna use 4 guns (your interpritation of ME1) " and arguement against "im only gona use 4 guns (the amount listed of guns in ME3)"?

You could get the spectre master gear guns before half the game was over.  It was rediculously easy to make money in ME 1

specre master gear dint show up intill you got 1mil achviement, and the the gear was worth alot. you also dint get the next master gear untill level 50.

so in ME1 you would use about 10 assault rifles, 10 shotguns, yadda yadda. im mass effect 2. you start off with  doo doo assault rifle, then 2 hours later you meet garrus and he gives you the assault rifle you will be using for the REST of the game.

[Omega-202]

John Locke N7 wrote...
Thats like saying Diablo is a stupid game.

That's not even comparable.  

In Diablo, you're an unknown adventurer with no backing, no support and no gear.  

In Mass Effect, you're a well known hero with full backing from the whole galaxy, especially the System's Alliance and you should therefore be equipped with anything and everything that you can reasonably get your hands on.  Having to loot guns is absurd.  

I mean, the concept is so absurd that the even wrote Mordin some lines in ME2 where he makes fun of the fact that Spectres were expected to buy their own gear and how he said that the Salarian STG and Cerberus have the right idea.

[AgitatedLemon]

John Locke N7 wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

John Locke N7 wrote...

neubourn wrote...

As if anybody used guns other then the Spectre Master Gear in ME1 once they could afford em. "Oh theres 200+ guns, but im only gonna use 4"

you had to level up to get those guns.

how is "im only gonna use 4 guns (your interpritation of ME1) " and arguement against "im only gona use 4 guns (the amount listed of guns in ME3)"?

You could get the spectre master gear guns before half the game was over.  It was rediculously easy to make money in ME 1

specre master gear dint show up intill you got 1mil achviement, and the the gear was worth alot. you also dint get the next master gear untill level 50.

so in ME1 you would use about 10 assault rifles, 10 shotguns, yadda yadda. im mass effect 2. you start off with  doo doo assault rifle, then 2 hours later you meet garrus and he gives you the assault rifle you will be using for the REST of the game.

I don't know anyone who takes 2 hours to recruit Garrus...

But I guess picking up the Revenant is a bad idea, or getting the Mattock.

[Darth Malice113]

I'm on the toilet.

[neubourn]

John Locke N7 wrote...

specre master gear dint show up intill you got 1mil achviement, and the the gear was worth alot. you also dint get the next master gear untill level 50.

so in ME1 you would use about 10 assault rifles, 10 shotguns, yadda yadda. im mass effect 2. you start off with  doo doo assault rifle, then 2 hours later you meet garrus and he gives you the assault rifle you will be using for the REST of the game.

Seriously....what game were YOU playing?

For starters, youre acting as if people dont have multiple playthroughs on ME1, where getting to level 50 (or 60 in NG+) wasnt entirely common and quite easy to do.

"Worth alot?" Again...what game were you playing? Making money was ridiculously easy in ME1...there is no excuse why you shouldnt have maxed out 999999999 credits 2/3rd or even halfway through the game. How? Oh...by selling those 200+ guns that drop for loot that youll never use becuse you bought Spectre Gear for your ENTIRE SQUAD already.

[John Locke N7]

Omega-202 wrote...

John Locke N7 wrote...

nostalgia applys i havnt played ME1 in a long time. ive replayed that game recently, ive replayed that game MENY times and each time its fun.

EVERY TIME i try to replay ME2, the combat gets in the way of me being able to stand playing it. and i have to stop.

i always thought "troll" ment someone who got off on contraditory statements. I THINK i have a legit arguement.

In reality, people have objectively based ME2's combat to be superior by the criteria that state that it is more diverse, more challenging, more balanced and more tactical.  

ME1 was a spam-fest dominated by pistols, CC and Immunity/Barrier-spam.  You never needed to take cover.  You never needed to tactically apply powers.  You never needed to stop shooting.  

ME1 was the inferior game when it came to gameplay.  Anyone who agrees with you should just be playing ME2 on "casual" difficulty and be done with it.  

i call complete bull.
if i had, no, HAVE way more funplaying mass effect 1 everytime and dont have ANY fun playing mass effect 2. there is not objecvtivity there.

tactically apply powers in mass effect 2? what a joke. you NEVER needed to use powers in me2 because ALL the powers sucked! talents in ME1 were way more usefull and tactically applying powers was FAR better in ME1 then in ME2.

even playing ME2 on casual is hard. not difficult, just BORING. ME 1 on a BRAND NEW CHARACTER on the HARDEST DIFFICULTY is a thrill.

[Icinix]

If exclusive DLC and unlocks continue at this rate..


93,674 - not including variations with mods.

[KotorEffect3]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

The amount you got per enemy was pretty insane too.

Yeah, near the end of my most recent playthrough of ME1 I started buying all of the Spectre X guns and giving them to the people on my team, even if they were untrained with them. Still had 9999999 creds.

I always felt rediculous running around in ME 1 with a sniper rifle on my back that I wasn't going to use because I was playing a class that wasn't trained in them.