301 réponses à ce sujet

[furryrage59]

nitefyre410 wrote...

furryrage59 wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

furryrage59 wrote...

Hang on, you're moaning at me for being literal now?

If people don't understand the words/language they use, maybe they shouldn't use it no?

You are attempting to win an argument based on an interpretation we're all aware wasn't being used.

He's right, you now he's right, but still you think you can grasp a victory from straws.

Good luck with that.

Great intelligence and normal intelligence is the difference between a dustbinman and a rocket scientist, so no, it's completely wrong.

Your argument doesn't even make any sense, you're berating me for pointing out his massive exaggeration/incorrect useage of a word.

But yeah, good luck with that indeed.

Edit - Not going to waste my breath on your paper thin argument anymore.

  

LOL   -      

You have yourself a mightly good day.

You too

[Ziggeh]

furryrage59 wrote...

you're berating me for pointing out his massive exaggeration

I'm berating you for not understanding what exaggeration is. He knows he exaggerated; He was lending an extreme example to underline his point.

[piemanz]

furryrage59 wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

furryrage59 wrote...

Hang on, you're moaning at me for being literal now?

If people don't understand the words/language they use, maybe they shouldn't use it no?

You are attempting to win an argument based on an interpretation we're all aware wasn't being used.

He's right, you now he's right, but still you think you can grasp a victory from straws.

Good luck with that.

Great intelligence and normal intelligence is the difference between a dustbinman and a rocket scientist, so no, it's completely wrong.

Your argument doesn't even make any sense, you're berating me for pointing out his massive exaggeration/incorrect useage of a word.

But yeah, good luck with that indeed.

Edit - Not going to waste my breath on your paper thin argument anymore.

No, you're using the literal meaning to mask the fact that the thread title is obviously implying that the features of one game demands a greater intelligence than the other, which is false.

Nobody is saying you need to be a rocket scientist to play either game.

Modifié par piemanz, 19 février 2012 - 04:09 .

[Ziggeh]

Lakan Suko wrote...
Yes, but it is the elements that many of us play the game, and what devs put their blood and sweat into for, as well, you cannot necessarily have the benefits without the elements... You take out the elements, you will not enjoy the same level of benefits as if the elements remained. The mass effect 2 "inventory system" gives much evidence to this, where is the meat in it?

Right, and I understand that. Many people like an inventory system, but as I say, that's a preference rather than a standard of value. When I say "the benefits" I mean the end results, rather than the enjoyment available within.

Personally, and luckily for me and not so for you it seems the devs are with me here, I saw the overly weighty incremental system as a barrier to the things the game had to offer that weren't to be found in any number of other games. Not that, again, originality is of inherent value, but I saw a focus on vendor trash and minor statistical benefits as detracting from other, more interesting (subjective again) aspects.

[Lakan Suko]

Ziggeh wrote...

Lakan Suko wrote...
Yes, but it is the elements that many of us play the game, and what devs put their blood and sweat into for, as well, you cannot necessarily have the benefits without the elements... You take out the elements, you will not enjoy the same level of benefits as if the elements remained. The mass effect 2 "inventory system" gives much evidence to this, where is the meat in it?

Right, and I understand that. Many people like an inventory system, but as I say, that's a preference rather than a standard of value. When I say "the benefits" I mean the end results, rather than the enjoyment available within.

Personally, and luckily for me and not so for you it seems the devs are with me here, I saw the overly weighty incremental system as a barrier to the things the game had to offer that weren't to be found in any number of other games. Not that, again, originality is of inherent value, but I saw a focus on vendor trash and minor statistical benefits as detracting from other, more interesting (subjective again) aspects.

And in that case, bigger "end results" can be achieved here, instead of completely scrapping a certain aspect of the game that had much potential, point is, if the system felt too weighty and trivial, then find out how to remove that, without taking everything down with it.

As well, I believe you are exaggerating the focus required into this system a little, little to non aspects were harmed for the way of this system, infact some important aspects that were in me1 were gone as a result. In my view, oversimplification will hurt the end result, you have to balance it. The feature shouldn't take away from the game, and in the same sense, it shouldn't be taken away from the game either. This is why
improving on something is far better than completely killing something off.

Point is, fron my earlier post, you cannot have the benefit without the elements.

Modifié par Lakan Suko, 19 février 2012 - 04:49 .

[Ziggeh]

Lakan Suko wrote...
And in that case, bigger "end results" can be achieved here, instead of completely scrapping a certain aspect of the game that had much potential, point is, if the system felt too weighty and trivial, then find out how to remove that, without taking everything down with it.

And I think that's what they did, but clearly milage may vary.

Lakan Suko wrote...
As well, I believe you are exaggerating the focus required into this system a little, little to non aspects were harmed for the way of this system, infact some important aspects that were in me1 were gone as a result. In my view, oversimplification will hurt the end result, you have to balance it.

True, "focus" is not the right word, but it's reinforced in my memories of ME1 due to the repetition it involved. And again, I do think it hurt the pacing, but also that it was obtuse and laborious, but that those last two are definitely implementation problems.

[heyimthecrab]

N00blet666 wrote...

If anything I think ME3 is less dumbed down than ME2. There are more RPG elements,you can customize weaponry,your skill tree's are more complicated than ME2's, you can still customize armor. ME1's weapon system sucked. All the weapons were the same they just had a different number next to them. The weapons in ME3 are actually different weapons not the same weapon with a different number. The combat is faster and more difficult. I don't see how you could possibly think that ME3 is dumbed down.

lmao the mass effect 1 system for everything was horrible 
it made me wanna punch my screen 
"raikou 1-7 "

[AlanC9]

Lakan Suko wrote...
And in that case, bigger "end results" can be achieved here, instead of completely scrapping a certain aspect of the game that had much potential, point is, if the system felt too weighty and trivial, then find out how to remove that, without taking everything down with it.

But you're simply assuming what you're trying to prove here. I don't think there is any potential in traditional inventory. It was bad in D&D, it's been bad for the entire history of CRPGs, and it's bad now.

Not that ME2's inventory was perfect, of course. Bio should have removed credits and shops while they were at it. I'm still on the fence about activating upgrades via mining. Though f you've absolutely got to have exploration, I guess it's better to have a role-playting reason to do the exploration rather than simply leave it in for metagaming.

Anyway, ME3 is returning some of these aspects. You want a compromise position? Well, that's exactly what you're getting.

Edit: "bad" above is a bit of an overstatement. I actually mean something more like "worthless." A good inventory system doesn't have to drag the game down; only the bad ones like ME1's do that.

Modifié par AlanC9, 19 février 2012 - 04:59 .

[AkiKishi]

I still feel that a lot of the stuff in ME1 was there just because. I'd like to ask the people who liked the bloated inventory just how much of that stuff they actually put to use.

[Il Divo]

BobSmith101 wrote...

I still feel that a lot of the stuff in ME1 was there just because. I'd like to ask the people who liked the bloated inventory just how much of that stuff they actually put to use.

Probably the single biggest killer for Virmire, a sequence I otherwise would have loved, was the inventory telling me that I had surpassed the 150 item limit and needed to break down omnigel. Completely ruined the pacing of the experience.

Modifié par Il Divo, 19 février 2012 - 05:05 .

[Lakan Suko]

Ziggeh wrote...


And I think that's what they did, but clearly milage may vary.

Milage does indeed vary, as said in my second to last post, and what I said in my last post, was definitely not the milage that Bioware was in.

Ziggeh wrote...

True, "focus" is not the right word, but it's reinforced in my memories of ME1 due to the repetition it involved. And again, I do think it hurt the pacing, but also that it was obtuse and laborious, but that those last two are definitely implementation problems.

implementing problems that can and were of course requested by many to be repaired. Unfortunately for us, we never got our repair...

[AlanC9]

Your "we" didn't their repair, but my "we" did.

There's a separate argument about what the optimal design is for ME fans collectively. Not my problem as long as I'm not wearing a "Bioware" tag.

[Lakan Suko]

AlanC9 wrote...

Lakan Suko wrote...
And in that case, bigger "end results" can be achieved here, instead of completely scrapping a certain aspect of the game that had much potential, point is, if the system felt too weighty and trivial, then find out how to remove that, without taking everything down with it.

But you're simply assuming what you're trying to prove here. I don't think there is any potential in traditional inventory. It was bad in D&D, it's been bad for the entire history of CRPGs, and it's bad now.

Not that ME2's inventory was perfect, of course. Bio should have removed credits and shops while they were at it. I'm still on the fence about activating upgrades via mining. Though f you've absolutely got to have exploration, I guess it's better to have a role-playting reason to do the exploration rather than simply leave it in for metagaming.

Anyway, ME3 is returning some of these aspects. You want a compromise position? Well, that's exactly what you're getting.

Edit: "bad" above is a bit of an overstatement. I actually mean something more like "worthless." A good inventory system doesn't have to drag the game down; only the bad ones like ME1's do that.

If it's so damn bad, then why do games keep returning to it then? I am fine with varying opinions, so long as you also maintain consistency... As well, again, this is why you don't remove things like that, it only leads to other things going to lag behind, like the credits and shops... In an rpg, these two without an inventory system is an odd setup.

And no, I'm not "assuming what I'm trying to prove", I'm making a point saying that destroying and basterdizing something isn't always the solution, infact, shouldn't even be considered unless the situation is really desperate... They built on top of some of their other things in me2, and took that to a bigger extent in me3(with the return of a few nice features).

Modifié par Lakan Suko, 19 février 2012 - 05:30 .

[brfritos]

SNascimento wrote...

ME2 > ME1.
.
Fact.

Statement.
Corrected for you. 

ME1 > ME2

Fact

[Il Divo]

brfritos wrote...

SNascimento wrote...

ME2 > ME1.
.
Fact.

Statement.
Corrected for you. 

ME1 > ME2

Fact

Incomplete sentece.

Fact.

[BatmanPWNS]

ME1 over ME2? Yeah............... I don't see how.

[Lakan Suko]

Il Divo wrote...

brfritos wrote...

SNascimento wrote...

ME2 > ME1.
.
Fact.

Statement.
Corrected for you. 

ME1 > ME2

Fact

Incomplete sentece.

Fact.

Tbh, not sure if one can truly be over the other in my books... But what I'm hoping for

ME3>ME2

ME3>ME1

Modifié par Lakan Suko, 19 février 2012 - 05:36 .

[RocketManSR2]

This board is really becoming intolerable. When will these stupid topics stop? Oh, that's right, they won't. In fact, they'll just get worse after the full game releases. Between further spoilers and this idiocy, I'm going to stop coming here for a long time. Peace out.

[Il Divo]

Lakan Suko wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

brfritos wrote...

SNascimento wrote...

ME2 > ME1.
.
Fact.

Statement.
Corrected for you. 

ME1 > ME2

Fact

Incomplete sentece.

Fact.

Tbh, not sure if one can truly be over the other in my books... But what I'm hoping for

ME3>ME2

ME3>ME1

I think we're all hoping for this option. It certainly would mean greater bang for our $60 bucks.

[Savber100]

If you're worried about dumbed-down entertainment then go do something productive for society.

Complaining about video games on an internet forum to people you don't even know is certainly not making you any smarter.

Modifié par Savber100, 19 février 2012 - 05:40 .

[Naughty Bear]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

This board is really becoming intolerable. When will these stupid topics stop? Oh, that's right, they won't. In fact, they'll just get worse after the full game releases. Between further spoilers and this idiocy, I'm going to stop coming here for a long time. Peace out.

You won't last without getting your fix of the BSN, you will go insane. Coming back will also drive you insane.
 
Take your pick.

[imnar]

Il Divo wrote...

Lakan Suko wrote...

Right, they need a valid reason, which was my point I was stating. Again, I personally think removal is an extreme option better as a last resort, and in light of what happened from me1 to me2, as well as da2, I feel even more inclined to my opinion.

I think it's a combination of factors. The problem is that one person's valid reason will be another person's outrage. But that can be the case with any game. In general, I've seen more critical praise for Baldur's Gate II over BG1. Yet you'll still find people who prefer the original because of the extra emphasis on sandbox gameplay. I, for example, am more inclined to the oppositet stance with ME; I found it to be a much better overall experience, because of the removal of exploration/inventory.

i counter that removal of inventory is unnecessary. if a person choses they can avoid the exploration and the loot chase. i enjoy freely exploring and picking up loot and seeing which combinations or perks work best for me. no one is making players pick up armor, weapons or upgrades they don't want. if i want to run through shooting, cutting short convos and not picking up one piece of armor...i can...if i want to run to the ends of the universe to find different types of  scorpion armor so that everyone of my companions has a matching set...i can...

[Lakan Suko]

Savber100 wrote...

If you're worried about dumbed-down entertainment then go do something productive for society.

Complaining about video games on an internet forum to people you don't even know is certainly not making you any smarter.

I'm not sure you understand the point of this thread, or a forum for that matter.

You share your views and discuss, you are contributing one way or another, you also make your posts visible to the devs.

Sheesh...

[Matinek]

Exia001 wrote...

Oh, look its this thread again...I love how people that post things like this

MASS EFFECT SUCKS
...but I'm a fan

Heh, People are idiots, hopefully not enough to support ACTA, but **** them, lets all stare at Tali's face and peek at Miranda's ass 

[Il Divo]

imnar wrote...

i counter that removal of inventory is unnecessary. if a person choses they can avoid the exploration and the loot chase. i enjoy freely exploring and picking up loot and seeing which combinations or perks work best for me. no one is making players pick up armor, weapons or upgrades they don't want. if i want to run through shooting, cutting short convos and not picking up one piece of armor...i can...if i want to run to the ends of the universe to find different types of  scorpion armor so that everyone of my companions has a matching set...i can...

And that's wonderful. And I don't want that, particularly in as bad a fashion as Mass Effect handled. If the defense for the inventory system is "don't pick up items", I think that's a pretty big indicator of just how terrible the system was. "It's optional" doesn't really work as a defense when I'm paying $60 for this as a form of entertainment; I want the best experience possible. Time+ resources used to set up planet exploration and inventory is time and resources not spent on things to increase the product's entertainment value. At best, by avoiding the inventory, which is not itself easy despite your claims, I come out with no "net loss" in entertainment.

Modifié par Il Divo, 19 février 2012 - 05:59 .