79 réponses à ce sujet

[Finis Valorum]

UpLiftingVanguard wrote...

I wholly agree with what was said above. This I did time and time again and without such a feature it won't be game breaking to say I'll not buy the game, but it'll feel like something is missing that could of significantly  contributed to the immersion of the game.

All these "little things" do turn what has the potential to be a great game into just a good game or even merely a decent one (if they undertake no effort to fix the headache inducing FOV).

[UpLiftingVanguard]

Exactly, all the little things that the fan base appreciate amount to something larger and an overall better experience whether essential or not.

[JaegerBane]

apoc_reg wrote...

I'm not sure what you're point is, but I know I'm not interested in some semantic feud. 

For me its immersion breaking and ruins how I played mass effect 2. If it doesn't for you then I'm happy for you...!

Fine then, I'll make it simple - you're kicking up a
fuss over minor details, before you've even played the game. If you
can't see how silly that comes across, and hence how unlikely anyone with the power to do something about it is actually going to do anything, then I'm afraid you'll likely be disappointed no matter what happens.

Don't get me wrong, they may change it - they're still asking for feedback, so there may be scope to change it. You've got every right to ask for it. The only issue I had was that you were making the lack of holstering and film grain sound like they'd recast the entire voice cast or radically changed the whole plot so that it took place in modern day or something.

But there are many posts on this forum and others from PC and console players who do care so maybe you should not assume your opinion is all that counts....

Crikey, there are people on this forum claiming their cancelling their pre-order because they didn't like the textures, if I assumed that everything being demanded on this forum had any merit I'd be thinking ME3 wouldn't sell a single copy.

And where on earth did you get the idea that questioning you somehow meant I believe my own opinion is all that counts? Give the strawman a break.

[nazgul1x]

UpLiftingVanguard wrote...

shunjalo wrote...

If someone doesn't feel any immersion was lost, good for them. There are many of us who do, and I simply cannot understand why would a developer like Bioware (an experienced developer by any standard) decide that such nice little (or not-so-little, as the case may be) touches are not important enough in a game like Mass Effect, where player immersion is two-thirds of experience. Are they really trying to turn Mass Effect into straight-out shooter? They should have made it first-person then! I can't remember how many times I simply rotated the camera around my character, to look at the face and armour, especially against a nice backdrop. Do you not remember that? Looking at the Shepard from the front with the moons and stars in the background while you stroll around on a new, unexplored world? First game was full of such moments, second too (minus the driving-on-the-surface part). Third? Nope. Not without the weapon holstering (or lowering) and camera rotation (which is linked to holstering, btw). Shame, says I. Real shame.

I wholly agree with what was said above. This I did time and time again and without such a feature it won't be game breaking to say I'll not buy the game, but it'll feel like something is missing that could of significantly  contributed to the immersion of the game.

This and This
Believe me, the free camera issue is not a deal breaker by any stretch of the imagination, but I really did use that feature a lot. It is annoying to me, to have a feature (I enjoy) in a game, and then have it missing in a subsequent  game in that same series.

Now having said that....I have pre-ordered Mass Effect 3, expect it to be an AWESOME game, and won't let these side issues deter me from having a great time playing it for waaaaaaaay too many hours.

[NN77]

Is this thread for real? People complaing about Shepard having their gun out? You serious?! ಠ_ಠ

[jedierick]

Vendictar_XB wrote...

jedierick wrote...

Two of my friends have already canceled their pre-orders in part because of this.

Wait let me see if I understand your friends here. Not being able to holster your gun is SUCH a problem that they feel like they can no longer enjoy the entire game? That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. 

Too many gamers demand perfection these days. If ME3 does not contain EVERY SINGLE FEATURE they are hoping for, they rage-quit. Sigh...

Why is it rediculous? They dont enjoy things being removed from games they enjoy, they also canceled their ME2 pre-orders until BioWare put NG+ back into it at the last minute.

It is not about perfection, it is about Bioware moving backwards, removing things that were enjoyable, and fun. It takes part of the fun out of the game.  This isnt like them adding something, like ammo\\heat clips, this is about them removing soemthing that enhanced the gameplay for them.

And BTW there are other things that annoyed them, this was just the straw that broke the camels back for them. They also thought the annimations, shepard running, were childish and an utter pain to watch.

For me, I still have my collectors edition paid off, and I plan on piclking it up, I am not rage quitting, but I dont like the fact that BioWare is moving backwards intstead of forwards with what coudl be last ME game.

[sh4manz]

jedierick wrote...

Being able to holster my weapon was a big thing to me in ME1, 2. This being gone in ME3, honestly it just made the game seem more like every other game, kind of like a FPS instead of a RPG. Two of my friends have already canceled their pre-orders in part because of this..

I highlighted what is wrong with this.

If this little thing at all is a deciding factor in any way, shape, or form, your friends are very petty people.


In other news: weapons not being holstered in combat zones is fine, imho. I don't feel it ruins the game at all.

[MysteryNotes]

jenovaproject wrote...


I'm preeeeeetty sure you were not trained to push buttons with the barrel of your gun, either.

You do realise Shepard has two arms which he can use, right?
He can hold the gun with one, and use the other to push the button.

[jedierick]

sh4manz wrote...

jedierick wrote...

Being able to holster my weapon was a big thing to me in ME1, 2. This being gone in ME3, honestly it just made the game seem more like every other game, kind of like a FPS instead of a RPG. Two of my friends have already canceled their pre-orders in part because of this..

I highlighted what is wrong with this.

If this little thing at all is a deciding factor in any way, shape, or form, your friends are very petty people.


In other news: weapons not being holstered in combat zones is fine, imho. I don't feel it ruins the game at all.

Read the WHOLE post. They had other things they didnt like, the holstering of the weapon was the last straw for them. And why are they petty? I dont get why people can say others are petty for not buying something they dont like. Would you buy a car if it didnt have the features you didnt like, or if you were told you coudlnt get them later? They dont want to pay money for soemthign they dont like, it is as simple as that. 

You dont mind that holstering is removed, thats great god for you, if you dont agree thats fine as well, but dont judge other people becasue they dont want to pay their hard earned money for soemthing that they dont like.

[apoc_reg]

NN77 wrote...

Is this thread for real? People complaing about Shepard having their gun out? You serious?! ಠ_ಠ

No... complaining about losing what comes with holstering... use your brain before trolling.

When you holster in ME2 the camera zooms out (better for enjoying the envirmoents), the HUD disappears (looks nice and clean and atmospheric) AND a weapon isnt being shoved at a right angle everywhere.

P.s. JaegerBane... really, still going? Enjoy 

Modifié par apoc_reg, 18 février 2012 - 05:29 .

[Rob_K1]

apoc_reg wrote...

NN77 wrote...

Is this thread for real? People complaing about Shepard having their gun out? You serious?! ಠ_ಠ

No... complaining about losing what comes with holstering... use your brain before trolling.

When you holster in ME2 the camera zooms out (better for enjoying the envirmoents), the HUD disappears (looks nice and clean and atmospheric) AND a weapon isnt being shoved at a right angle everywhere.

P.s. JaegerBane... really, still going? I didnt read your wall of text but just accept its a big deal to me and clearly to some other people too

Then would it be better to say that not being able to holster isn't the problem, it's the fact you don't have the HUD dissapearing and the camera zoomed right in?

I can somewhat see the sense in the problem I just mentioned, even if it's not going to be a problem for me, but boiling it down to not being able to holster your weapon (as per the thread title) is silly in my view.

[apoc_reg]

Yep I agree. That's why I wrote a reply clarifying and expanding what I really meant afterwards.

I was mad when I wrote the original post :-)

[Khran1505]

I never even used the film grain effect, I found it way too distracting.

Holstering on the other hand I'll kind of miss, but I've never found it essential to my game time and it never really broke the flow for me during my gameplay demo.

[Wookie1987]

Eh? Quite frankly i'd rather have a free look key that allows me to turn my head about with my gun raised than unnecessarily putting my gun away in situations that would warrant keeping the gun out. I'd only take actual issue if my gun was out whilst walking around a 'safe' area (like the Citadel) and in fact found it more annoying that i could whip out my gun and fire it willy-nilly around the citadel in ME 1 etc without anyone batting an eyelid. That seems more immersion breaking than anything else. FOV options would be nice too.

Film grain i usually find over rated anyway and doesn't bother me. Options are always nice however. I just wish people would not use the word immersion breaking when practically anything can be considered immersion breaking like walking around with weapons out in safe areas...

[111987]

Wookie1987 wrote...

Eh? Quite frankly i'd rather have a free look key that allows me to turn my head about with my gun raised than unnecessarily putting my gun away in situations that would warrant keeping the gun out. I'd only take actual issue if my gun was out whilst walking around a 'safe' area (like the Citadel) and in fact found it more annoying that i could whip out my gun and fire it willy-nilly around the citadel in ME 1 etc without anyone batting an eyelid. That seems more immersion breaking than anything else. FOV options would be nice too.

Film grain i usually find over rated anyway and doesn't bother me. Options are always nice however. I just wish people would not use the word immersion breaking when practically anything can be considered immersion breaking like walking around with weapons out in safe areas...

Completely agreed. That is far more immersive breaking than acting how a proper soldier would act in a combat area, yet people don't complain about that.

[Finis Valorum]

Wookie1987 wrote...

Eh? Quite frankly i'd rather have a
free look key that allows me to turn my head about with my gun raised
than unnecessarily putting my gun away in situations that would warrant
keeping the gun out. I'd only take actual issue if my gun was out
whilst walking around a 'safe' area (like the Citadel) and in fact
found it more annoying that i could whip out my gun and fire it
willy-nilly around the citadel in ME 1 etc without anyone batting an
eyelid. That seems more immersion breaking than anything else. FOV
options would be nice too.

Not really, in your example you are choosing to actively break your own immersion by whipping out your gun and starting to randomly shoot at things or unkillable npc's, in ME3's case however the fact that we must look like an idiot in the "combat zones" all the time, whilst our squadmates can at least lower their weapons ,and being forced to shove our weapons in the faces of every NPC we talk to in the "combat zones" is being decided for us by the developers with no option provided for us to do things differently and thus keep our immersion intact.

[Wookie1987]

Finis Valorum wrote...

Wookie1987 wrote...

Eh? Quite frankly i'd rather have a
free look key that allows me to turn my head about with my gun raised
than unnecessarily putting my gun away in situations that would warrant
keeping the gun out. I'd only take actual issue if my gun was out
whilst walking around a 'safe' area (like the Citadel) and in fact
found it more annoying that i could whip out my gun and fire it
willy-nilly around the citadel in ME 1 etc without anyone batting an
eyelid. That seems more immersion breaking than anything else. FOV
options would be nice too.

Not really, in your example you are choosing to actively break your own immersion by whipping out your gun and starting to randomly shoot at things or unkillable npc's, in ME3's case however the fact that we must look like an idiot in the "combat zones" all the time, whilst our squadmates can at least lower their weapons ,and being forced to shove our weapons in the faces of every NPC we talk to in the "combat zones" is being decided for us by the developers with no option provided for us to do things differently and thus keep our immersion intact.

Ok, it was abit of a brute force example, but the basic argument is the same imo. I more often than i'd ever like, pull out/fire by accident, but its no less immersion breaking than putting a weapon away in a clearly hostile zone. I understand the argument to be able to holster and don't disagree that the option *should* be there as a matter of personal choice, but i don't understand how people consider it so utterly immersion breaking in the context of all the other things that could be equally or more immersion breaking when considering all the other things.

*Edit* And as for the hud/free look, better FOV options in general and a freelook head turn like in Arma2 would be more fitting. Still, tis my opinion. It's all i can express.

Modifié par Wookie1987, 18 février 2012 - 06:27 .

[deathlord413]

I admit that I holstered my gun when I was in combat areas, but in all honesty I felt like an idiot for doing so. As a soldier in an area where I could get shot by a sniper those few seconds I would need to unholster my gun and risk it getting caught on something just sounds like a plan for disaster. In a tactical situation you take out the weakest link or the leader. A leader with a holstered gun out in the open sounds like a weak link to me.

[JaegerBane]

apoc_reg wrote...

NN77 wrote...

Is this thread for real? People complaing about Shepard having their gun out? You serious?! ಠ_ಠ

No... complaining about losing what comes with holstering... use your brain before trolling.

When you holster in ME2 the camera zooms out (better for enjoying the envirmoents), the HUD disappears (looks nice and clean and atmospheric) AND a weapon isnt being shoved at a right angle everywhere.

P.s. JaegerBane... really, still going? Enjoy 

What Rob said, really. I can understand someone being a bit peeved that you're getting less control and freedom to see the environments - I don't necessarily think the reduction you'd see will be that big, but I get the issue.

Claiming that a simple thing like manual holstering is the difference between enjoying the game and not sounds, frankly, like you'e looking for things to be annoyed about, which is likely why you get bit of ribbing from the other posters - but I get it, at least

[Darth333]

111987 wrote...
Completely agreed. That is far more immersive breaking than acting how a proper soldier would act in a combat area, yet people don't complain about that.

The answer is simple: it's an option (a useless one) but nevertheless an option with no obligation to use it.

Modifié par Darth333, 18 février 2012 - 08:19 .

[111987]

Darth333 wrote...

111987 wrote...
Completely agreed. That is far more immersive breaking than acting how a proper soldier would act in a combat area, yet people don't complain about that.

The answer is simple: it's an option (a useless one) but nevertheless an option with no obligation to use it.

My point is, did anyone complain about the fact that you no longer had the option to whip out your guns on the Citadel in ME2?

Anyways, I can see why it might be a little disappointing, but it isn't a gamebreaker for me.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

I'd rather see offline co-op...

[Drone223]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

I'd rather see offline co-op...

[zambingo]

Kristofer1 wrote...

As an infantry Marine, who has deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan I will say we never ever ever sling our weapons in a combat zone, unless absolutely necessary. Perhaps an obstacle, but it is immediately back out.
If on base, yeah I'll sling it. So where is the problem? His spring is similar to some sprints Ive seen, done, with a loaded rifle.
It actually makes more sense for him to have it out at all times when there is a potential threat.

deathlord413 wrote...

I admit that I holstered my gun when I was in combat areas, but in all honesty I felt like an idiot for
doing so. As a soldier in an area where I could get shot by a sniper  those few seconds I would need to unholster my gun and risk it getting caught on something just sounds like a plan for disaster. In a tactical situation you take out the weakest link or the leader. A leader with a holstered gun out in the open sounds like a weak link to me.

Truly rad POVs. And thank you both for your service.

Modifié par zambingo, 19 février 2012 - 03:26 .