448 réponses à ce sujet

[Battlepope190]

Freakiq wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Freakiq wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Guys, it can't be implemented because there's not enough memory for it.

On the PC there's no such limitations, why put them in place there?

Why make certain features exclusive to certain platforms?

It's like how the addition of an extra chapter in Gears 1 PC irritated a lot of Xbox fans.

X-box player chose an inferior platform though, why do PC players have to pay for their decisions?

And here comes the elitist garbage; please leave our thread.

[supervoyant]

up

[Rivercurse]

Not read the thread, but making it after the games gone gold?

[spirosz]

bennyjammin79 wrote...

Can't holster your weapon in a combat zone? How immersion breaking.

Hahaha!

[TheoCN]

Battlepope190 wrote...

Freakiq wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Freakiq wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Guys, it can't be implemented because there's not enough memory for it.

On the PC there's no such limitations, why put them in place there?

Why make certain features exclusive to certain platforms?

It's like how the addition of an extra chapter in Gears 1 PC irritated a lot of Xbox fans.

X-box player chose an inferior platform though, why do PC players have to pay for their decisions?

And here comes the elitist garbage; please leave our thread.

i dont get why some peoples still wanna argue about xbox and pc, as we could even compare in the same category.

one if for  casuals. who dont wanna have any trouble with hardware, just insert and play.
the other one is for people who wants a little more, even if it gives you a little more trouble to take care of.
and if you wanna argue about that too, think about a cell phone from 7 years ago and a smarth phone, as they call today. brand new.
both can make calls, which is the first purpose of having one, but they are not the same, NO MATTER what you want to believe.

so the questions still stands, why pc players, who have a MUCH BETTER equipment, have to play a game for another equipment stands?
because the game industry mostly cares about the console industry, because, OF COURSE, it is easier.

if you have to create better things, everytime to launch a game, it will be harder, but if you can just make simple games, and still make a fortune, why botter?
just like angry birds. How complex or difficut it is to create those animations?

And applying that concept to ME3.
Why make a better looking, more realistic, more enjoyable to your eyes, if people will buy anyways? and even defend that they dont lose time doing those things, because what matters is the story, they will say.

Well, im sorry to say this on your face, but teh graphics matter to everyone, even for you! Or there would be no high resolution SETTINGS in EVERY GAME! Or do you play evething in the lower resolution, if your machine can handle better?
And for peoples who pays 1000 bucks in their rigs, it matters even more, the graphics matter so much as the story, and they have ALL the right to complain and ask for more, or when you pay someone to cut your hair, and it is not done it right, so you see there is a few problems after, but hey.. you may say.. it will grow ! Right?

[Hawkules]

On topic, I would really like to see this reimplemented. After playing the first two games it seems like a strange removal, although sadly in line with the lighter RPG elements.

[NOD-INFORMER37]

apoc_reg wrote...

NOD-INFORMER37 wrote...

People are 110% right about the immersion, it may not seem like a big detail but in the end it really does Effect us Massively! (pun intended, but I'm still dead serious)

Ha gold star for that one :-)

lol thanx xD

[NOD-INFORMER37]

dhale1975 wrote...

alex90c wrote...

dhale1975 wrote...

alex90c wrote...

Sure you can get cool screenshots and it's nice from an RP perspective, but that's about it. It's not a giant immersion breaker/

Huh? If it's nice from an RP perspective, and RP is a huge part of this game, how is that NOT an immersion breaker? I don't understand.

It's not an immersion breaker because while you may believe RP is a huge part of the game, holstering a weapon is not a large percentage of that "huge part" at all.

All you've done here is feign ignorance.

You are completely clueless as to what the many people on this thread have been saying. Perhaps you should go through the whole thing and look at the various reasons people gave for wanting the option back.

After a round of combat, a lot of people like to holster there weapons to walk around, take in the amazing scenery, enjoy the FOV, get ready for the next wave, etc... Those are examples of immersion. Those things are a huge part of RP/action element to a lot of people. Even in a "combat zone" there were many quiet stretches in ME2, where you could do these things. You ddn't have to be in combat stance the whole damn time.

If it was not important, then you would not have this many people complaining about it. So you don't have a problem with it, so what? Others do and we have valid reasons why.

This, for those of you saying that "because its a combat zone it doesnt matter". 

Plus walking around with your gun aiming at everything/everyone is just awkward, ok?

Modifié par NOD-INFORMER37, 17 février 2012 - 10:18 .

[Tumak]

I agree with this thread with my whole heart. I was using holstering in ME and ME2 always after battles because it felt wrong to run around pointing gun at everything when there was no enemies in sight. I used holtering to get better FOV, plus exploration felt better with my weapon holster. It is a small thing but it is significant for me. Please Bioware reconsider bringing this feature back, and if you will not, then at least give us the option to lower our weapon in combat zones.

[GreatCake]

Tumak wrote...

I agree with this thread with my whole heart. I was using holstering in ME and ME2 always after battles because it felt wrong to run around pointing gun at everything when there was no enemies in sight. I used holtering to get better FOV, plus exploration felt better with my weapon holster. It is a small thing but it is significant for me. Please Bioware reconsider bringing this feature back, and if you will not, then at least give us the option to lower our weapon in combat zones.

Sweet chili peppers!!!! 

It's a video game. Do you think in any video game you've ever played that it's felt 'right' to do anything? We're talking about imitations of reality here. Bioware's game are more on the side of realistic, but not to the point where you actually think you're walking around with a gun and think it looks 'dumb' to point it at nothing...what you think in actual warfare situations they sit behind perfectly aligned cover systems and pop up and down like a wack-a-mole game?
You're not the one walking around with the gun, it's a pixelated figure who follows commands according to an engine that has been programmed by a HUMAN BEING...

SORRY, just venting. I think this is really not a big concern amongst the other issues in the demo, that's why.

[Matt VT Schlo]

What I want to know is this: why was holstering not a technical possibility for ME3, but a non issue for ME1 and ME2?!?! That's what makes no sense to me.

[Bluko]

Yeah I am with you guys.

At first I thought it wasn't a big deal, cause I didn't remember holstering my weapon that much in ME2. But when I played the Demo I was like :

"Wow what's over there? Dangit why does my gun have to be pointing at everything! I can't see around my Shepard and not be stuck in the locked Third Person Mode!"

It also looks bad when using ladders. Yes people do climb ladders with a weapons draw, but most would opt to holster or sling their weapon over their back so they can ascend/descend faster with two hands. This was a really lousy thing to cut if you ask me. I also have hard time believe it's a memory issue.

[kingsims]

The rolling, storm, jumping and climbing animations take up active memory because they can be done at any time. It is a memory issue because if they want a stable 30 fps on x360 then there must be a compromise.

They wouldn't want the PC version to be superior to 7 year old hardware. The PC version does not have any graphical limitations or memory limits on a 64bit os. Take a look at the UDK Samaritan demo. If anything blame Microsoft for sticking with the X360 for so long.

(Btw the pc version is already superior regardless because it can output 1080p at 60fps while the console can only do 720p at 30fps, sadly the pc version does not support gamepads)

Keyword compromise.

[dhale1975]

This feature was in the last 2 games. What I don't get is, why take something away that people (obviously from this thread and elsewhere on the net), were used to? During this decision, how come they couldn't omit one of the "new" features? Then, no one would even notice and holstering would still be in the game, along with plenty of new stuff.

You can't just think people will not notice, or care that something is gone, that has been apart of the game for 2 installments?

Modifié par dhale1975, 18 février 2012 - 02:14 .

[enigma8675309]

Put it back! darn it i want to holster my weapon.
It can not be that hard to patch into the pc version.

[snackrat]

I thought it was only removed for the demo... seriously? I feel stupid holding my arms straight up in front of me. Many times there are technically combatants still on the field but they are below/above/around obstacles and I won't be able to acess them anyway.

It was tolerable when removed from ME2 - specifically being able to draw your weapon outside of combat - (though passing time during the slow running by shooting up buildings was no longer an option) but I still would holster it regularly.
In ME3's demo I was just wandering around with no hostiles in sight... yet still had my arms stuck straight in front of me like a common boob, feeling incapable of seeing the best that I could because of those obnoxious limbs..

I like being able to holster/draw a weapon on my own initiative. Your Shepard can be combat-ready, always keeping a gun drawn in a hostile zone, or they might be a little more reactive, preferring not to freak out civilians with AIMING GUNS AT THEM EVERY TIME YOU LOOK THEIR WAY.

Modifié par Karsciyin, 18 février 2012 - 03:15 .

[dhale1975]

Karsciyin wrote...

I thought it was only removed for the demo... seriously? I feel stupid holding my arms straight up in front of me. Many times there are technically combatants still on the field but they are below/above/around obstacles and I won't be able to acess them anyway.

It was tolerable when removed from ME2 - specifically being able to draw your weapon outside of combat - (though passing time during the slow running by shooting up buildings was no longer an option) but I still would holster it regularly.
In ME3's demo I was just wandering around with no hostiles in sight... yet still had my arms stuck straight in front of me like a common boob, feeling incapable of seeing the best that I could because of those obnoxious limbs..

I like being able to holster/draw a weapon on my own initiative. Your Shepard can be combat-ready, always keeping a gun drawn in a hostile zone, or they might be a little more reactive, preferring not to freak out civilians with AIMING GUNS AT THEM EVERY TIME YOU LOOK THEIR WAY.

Like you, I was wondering around after I killed all hostiles with arms sticking straight out with nothing to shoot at, and everytime I would look towards Garrus or Liara, they would duck. wtf? As opposed to ME2, where I could holster the thing and get ready for the next wave. It was just plain better

[Lakan Suko]

I fully support this

[TheoCN]

This issue may sound like a silly problem, but aren't all the "silly", "little" things that make a difference?
i mean. eyes that blink, or hair that moves, hands that have separate fingers, feet that adjust to high ground as a stair, clothes that matches, faces that are good to your eye, choose your own name in the game, avatars in the forum or signatures, and i could go on and on.
These are all "silly" things, and are not REQUIRED to make a game great, but when you see these in a particular game. you think:
Hey. That is nice! That is something that i WASN'T expecting and here it is.

When this happens, the thing that cross our mind is that they really care. They really care about the game, about my fun, about me. and i'm gonna play this damn game and it will be great.

It is like breakfast in bed, it is not required to have a great meal, but tell if it is not nice when you receive one?

If you still didn't get, I MISSED!

ps: forgive my English.

Modifié par TheoCN, 18 février 2012 - 06:01 .

[Heavy01]

Dasher1010 wrote...

Why bring back a feature that nobody ever used?

Really?

REALLY?

The only people I can picture that would not use this feature is the casual console kiddies call of duty fans.

Wait a second that's the target audience they are aiming for. It all makes sense now.

[NOD-INFORMER37]

I believe this is what some ppl meant by multi taking away things from SP.

I'm starting to think they were right. x[

[TonyTitan]

Votes to keep holstering in ME3!

If I can't have that, then I'd like to at least be able to sit down at my desk in my quarters...or even lay down on my bed. My arms WILL get tired holding my gun up as I walk around pointing it at everyone I encounter after all.

Modifié par TonyTitan, 18 février 2012 - 07:05 .

[Crimson-Engage]

ItsFreakinJesus wrote...

Dasher1010 wrote...

Why bring back a feature that nobody ever used?

Just because you never used it doesn't mean it wasn't used.  Obviously, based on the collective reactions here and on every other forum on the internet, it was used a lot. 

Back on topic, if they implemented it back into the game, it'd only be possible on the PC version.  PS3's 256MB of RAM isn't enough due to all of the extra animations Bioware put in, be it combat rolls or heavy melee actions.  All of these animations had to be loaded at once, and it took up 4MB of RAM, which, when you're dealing with 256MB of RAM, is quite a lot of space. 

It may be possible to enable on the 360 due to it having 512MB of RAM, but enabling it on the 360, if it was possible, would make the 360 version superior to the PS3 version, and there's no way that would fly.

PC's have plenty of RAM (I have 10GB of RAM personally) and in regards to games, PC's having an edge over the consoles isn't going to make anyone flip out.

I just had to post to say that this is the dumbest post i'v ever read. 

ME2 on PS3 and 360 had the ability to holster weapons. I don't see why it would be a problem in the 3rd game.

[AndersL]

kingsims wrote...

(Btw the pc version is already superior regardless because it can output 1080p at 60fps while the console can only do 720p at 30fps, sadly the pc version does not support gamepads)

Control > Graphics. I haven't played Mass Effect 3 on the PC, but if it's anything like Mass Effect 2, it fails.