743 réponses à ce sujet

[GuardianAngel470]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Seriously, Phaedon, could you please just stop it or take it to PM?

I second this earnestly. 

[FRANCESCO84Inn]

i like this new type of scanning, this is a sci-fi story, and this scanning its part fo sci-fi universe, finally BioWare have put this scanning into the sistam, but its necessary the surface scanning on the plenet surface, not also a orbital scanning.

[Phaedon]

Wulfram wrote...

There have been entirely rational reasons given for why the toy ship thing is bad. The original point and click gave a far better sense of being Captain giving orders. Plus, people find it boring and silly. And the new mini-game seems like it devalues the reapers as serious enemies.

Well, I haven't seen any.

• A Captain giving orders? Then why searching around the system map in ME1 with the cursor like it's a bad point and click adventure game unlocks UNC missions? If you want to have a resource, or War Assets system without making broken, you need a limitations system. That's what fuel does. And for fuel to work, you must actually travel in non-predetermined paths which include the risk of not calculating how much fuel you will spend enough.
• Boring? Well, that's valid for ME2. Due to the new Reaper system which you actually refer to in your own post, it should be not. And again, you don't have to do it. We know that you can just unlock the necessary War Assets via sidequests or MP.
• "People found it silly". "entirely rational reasons" Clever pun.
• "Devalues the Reapers" - As opposed to just going around various systems, as we please, without the Reapers interfering, or not going to systems in which Reapers are relatively close at all. 

Also concerning "devaluing the Reapers". They detect you from several light years away, manage to travel from system to system within seconds, and can insta-kill you if they touch you. Eh?

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Seriously, Phaedon, could you please just stop it or take it to PM?

And why exactly is that? Am I replying or not to a post that you considered on-topic? Or do you have a problem with my arguments?

Modifié par Phaedon, 27 février 2012 - 01:26 .

[KoorahUK]

Seems to me that rather than BioWare not listening to fans, they have been listening closely to comments (or complaints) about ME2 scanning.

Scanning looks far less tedious and choresome. Instead of ponderously visiting each planet in each system in the hope it may yield resources, a player can carefully plan a route balancing fuel consumption against "area per ping" coverage and reaper awareness.

Much better than the somewhat robotic chore scanning became toward the end of the game in ME2

I'm somewhat ambivalent to the little Normandy. I can somewhat understand the complaint but at least with this system, physically piloting the ship around the system makes sense for the reasons stated above.

Sorry OP can't agree with you at all.

Modifié par KoorahUK, 27 février 2012 - 01:28 .

[Phaedon]

Sorry, just a question.

Should scanning not have been necessary (and I know Terror modded his game to avoid it, which is why I don't get the anger at all) in ME2, for your squadmates to survive, would you guys have had a problem with it?

Modifié par Phaedon, 27 février 2012 - 01:33 .

[Wulfram]

Phaedon wrote...


A Captain giving orders? Then why searching around the system map in ME1 with the cursor like it's a bad point and click adventure game unlocks UNC missions? If you want to have a resource, or War Assets system without making broken, you need a limitations system. That's what fuel does. And for fuel to work, you must actually travel in non-predetermined paths which include the risk of not calculating how much fuel you will spend enough.

The pixel hunting was pretty silly too, yes.  Cutting that while retaining the basic system would have been the best solution.

Fuel was no real limitation.  And there really shouldn't be a resources or War Assets system, at least not one tied to a silly mini-game

Boring? Well, that's valid for ME2. Due to the new Reaper system which you actually refer to in your own post, it should be not.

Adding pointless chase game doesn't seem likely to make it any more interesting.  Rather the opposite.

"People found it silly". "entirely rational reasons" Clever pun.

I did not enjoy this feature is the most rational reason for scrapping it.

"Devalues the Reapers" - As opposed to just going around various systems, as we please, without the Reapers interfering, or not going to systems in which Reapers are relatively close at all. Also concerning "devaluing the Reapers". They detect you from several light years away, manage to travel from system to system within seconds, and can insta-kill you if they touch you. Eh?

Not going into Reaper held territory at all for nonsensical scavenger hunts would be a lot better.  And when there's an actual reason to go into reaper held territory, handle it appropriately with cutscenes and whatnot, rather than routinely avoiding a couple of itty-bitty reapers in your toy Normandy.

[Wulfram]

Phaedon wrote...

Sorry, just a question.

Should scanning not have been necessary (and I know Terror modded his game to avoid it, which is why I don't get the anger at all) in ME2, for your squadmates to survive, would you guys have had a problem with it?

I'd still have a problem with it if it was necessary for weapon upgrades and suchlike.

[tiger-tron]

I loved the Mako exploration, it really gave you the feeling that you were an intergalactic explorer. Exploring strange new worlds and boldy going where no man has gone before.

*Sigh*

At least the planet scanning has gotten a bit more interesting with the Reaper chases.

[Terror_K]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Seriously, Phaedon, could you please just stop it or take it to PM?

Don't worry... I'm not going to play Phaedon's little muck-slinging game any more. If he wants to take that as a win, then he can. I don't care. I'm sick of his lies, slander, exaggerations and character assassinations, while continuiously ignoring and pretending my counter-points don't exist. I mean, when one of the threads he calls "a rant thread" that he himself links is not only clearly NOT a rant at all, but actually filled with many comments of agreement, including one immediately from moderator javierbegazo who says, "Very nice post, I agree with much of what you said, and I look forward to see how varied the paths to the end can be in ME3" then I'm not exactly sure what he's even going on about.

The thing is, I'm a passionate person. When I see something I like I get really happy, and when I see something I don't, I get the opposite. I know it's best to think before I post... let things settle a bit, but certain factors just irritate me, and it's hard to not feel annoyed by them, even when thinking about them after a while. Toy Normandy in the galaxy map is one of these things... others include breathing masks and impractical outfits, faux consequences and wasting time on aspects that seem more intended to branch out to the mainstream consumer than improve the gameplay given the style of games that Mass Effect was intended to be. I don't want to see another Dragon Age 2 on our hands here.

Phaedon wrote...

Should scanning not have been necessary (and I know Terror modded his game to avoid it, which is why I don't get the anger at all) in ME2, for your squadmates to survive, would you guys have had a problem with it?

Uh... no I didn't. Not sure where you got that from. I still do planet scanning like most people. Have been doing it lately in an ME2 playthrough I'm trying to get done before ME3 hits in fact.

Modifié par Terror_K, 27 février 2012 - 01:53 .

[tobynator89]

Oh the drama! Seriously guys, grow up. You're not in highschool anymore, at least I assume so.

[Aceattack]

 While I understand that practicality and
creative vision don't intermingle there was something to be said for the planet
exploration segments in Mass Effect 1. In ME1 those sections let to the feeling
of this grandiose universe and to a greater sense of exploration. They were
obviously not without flaws such and the copy paste buildings and the horrible
control and functionality of the Mako. I think their complete removal was a
mistake, there was plenty of fantastic things that could have been done to
improve the wheel not necessarily to reinvent it. With all that said ME1 went
from a large but oddly sparse universe to a smaller more compact one. In which
sense of scale was discarded for a more tightly focused game and story. 

[tmp7704]

AlanC9 wrote...

That's the best way to interpret how ME1 does things, yep. But that's a bad system. It's limited. The ship can only ever be at whatever I last clicked on. It magically and instantly appears there. No fuel used, no time taken.

I think Terror's point is, the exact position of the ship in ME1 wasn't specified because it simply wasn't used for anything. As such, it's not a bad system -- rather, i'd argue it's elegant in the sense it doesn't burden the player with something that has zero practical impact. And that it takes no time is a bonus rather than a drawback -- because it allows you to focus on game's story rather than force you to sit there going "are we there yet?" Note how no one seems to mind that travel between systems is just a brief cutscene, e.g. while they did complain about long elevator rides. It's the same principle.

As far as the piloting mini game goes, the main reason to me why it feel superfluous is its hands-on approach to what's actually work and responsibility of a crew member, not Shepard's. The commander of vessel like that generally just gives orders where to go and isn't burdened with menial task of actually driving all the way to destination himself/herself. They think and operate in terms of larger objectives ("get to Ilos") and not "take turn left after second star system here and then right, right, forward, left and remember there's speed limit between Tuchanka and the next stargate. Oh, and at least two fuel stops."

Modifié par tmp7704, 27 février 2012 - 01:50 .

[Terror_K]

tmp7704 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

That's the best way to interpret how ME1 does things, yep. But that's a bad system. It's limited. The ship can only ever be at whatever I last clicked on. It magically and instantly appears there. No fuel used, no time taken.

I think Terror's point is, the exact position of the ship in ME1 wasn't specified because it simply wasn't used for anything. As such, it's not a bad system -- rather, i'd argue it's elegant in the sense it doesn't burden the player with something that has zero practical impact. And that it takes no time is a bonus rather than a drawback -- because it allows you to focus on game's story rather than force you to sit there going "are we there yet?" Note how no one seems to mind that travel between systems is just a brief cutscene, e.g. while they did complain about long elevator rides. It's the same principle.

As far as the piloting mini game goes, the main reason to me why it feel superfluous is its hands-on approach to what's actually work and responsibility of a crew member, not Shepard's. The commander of vessel like that generally just gives orders where to go and isn't burdened with menial task of actually driving all the way to destination himself/herself. They think and operate in terms of larger objectives ("get to Ilos") and not "take turn left after second star system here and then right, right, forward, left and remember there's speed limit between Tuchanka and the next stargate. Oh, and at least two fuel stops."

Yeah... pretty much this. Spot on.

[Phaedon]

Wulfram wrote...
The pixel hunting was pretty silly too, yes.  Cutting that while retaining the basic system would have been the best solution.

So "pixel hunting was pretty silly" is now a logical argument? Elaborate.
Of course, neither is "it would have been the best solution". Resource gathering through loot or mining (generally exploration) has been integrated in a lot of ME2's systems. Such as weapon customization.

A lot of ME1's systems (such as armor customization) could just not fit well with ME2's story, or generally wouldn't collaborate well with other systems. Predicting how the game would have been if the relationships between various gameplay systems was altered drastically is not very clever. Not unless you make an entire text wall about it. Imo.

You are essentially suggesting removing ME2's entire grinding system (ME1 had the text-pop thingy). This could have had unknown repercussions to the rest of the game.

Fuel was no real limitation.  And there really shouldn't be a resources or War Assets system, at least not one tied to a silly mini-game

Hem. You are forgetting the "argument" in "rational argument".

I think that fuel, even with infinite credits, was a very real limitation. I'll explain why.

Some clusters require several "trips", while still maintaing the risk of losing some minerals, and even if they weren't, here's another thing. You always have to go to the main system of a cluster to refuel and jump to another system. That essentially destroyed the possibility of button-mashing the left mouse button everytime you entered a system, since you had to fly to get to various points. And that took time.

And why exactly shouldn't there be resources or War assets linked to that system? We know that just by doing the sidequests, you can unlock enough War Assets to get the perfect ending. So, why shouldn't the perfectionists be rewarded without any harm being caused to others? 

You also just call the new system, "silly", not caring to explain why. Well, that's sort of the entire point of anything close to a debate in this thread and you dismiss it. Please elaborate.

Adding pointless chase game doesn't seem likely to make it any more interesting.  Rather the opposite.

You need to explain why it is pointless. You even imply that the opposite would occur. Your opinion is interesting and level-headed and whatnot, but you don't provide any arguments to support it.

I think the idea is brilliant. The only problem I had with mining is how slow-paced and risk-free it was. I believe that this complaint is pretty common. Otherwise, why would mining be "boring"?

The new system adds serious risk and makes the pace faster. Dozens of people have remarked that in this thread.

I did not enjoy this feature is the most rational reason for scrapping it.

Emotions are irrational. They don't follow logic.

Even so, to just scrap it would be even more irrational. You are one guy, you aren't necessarily among the majority, and to scrap an entire grinding system instead of improving its shortcomings is silly.

Yes, the reason the Mako was removed was probably the community.

Not going into Reaper held territory at all for nonsensical scavenger hunts would be a lot better.  And when there's an actual reason to go into reaper held territory, handle it appropriately with cutscenes and whatnot, rather than routinely avoiding a couple of itty-bitty reapers in your toy Normandy.

I think you are misinformed. There are territories that you can't access at all (Like the Sol System), because they are literally Reaper territory. The territories that you can access are within the Reapers' sphere of influence (so to say) and which have Reapers in neighboring systems offer this mini-game instead.

As you'll notice from the footage, only the systems with the flashing Reapers can be visited.

Cutscenes take a lot of space and they can get very repetitive after a while. That's why I don't support them.

[Wulfram]

Yeah

Shepard says "Go there"
Pressley works out the route
Joker flies the ship.

[Phaedon]

Terror_K wrote...
Uh... no I didn't. Not sure where you got that from. I still do planet scanning like most people. Have been doing it lately  in an ME2 I'm trying to get done before ME3 hits in fact.

I know that you have said that you used Gibbed's save editor to add minerals. The forum search won't wield anything, even if I try to find it.

[Phaedon]

Wulfram wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

Sorry, just a question.

Should scanning not have been necessary (and I know Terror modded his game to avoid it, which is why I don't get the anger at all) in ME2, for your squadmates to survive, would you guys have had a problem with it?

I'd still have a problem with it if it was necessary for weapon upgrades and suchlike.

But it's not. You can do a lot by looting and cleverly managing your resources.

[Terror_K]

Phaedon wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
Uh... no I didn't. Not sure where you got that from. I still do planet scanning like most people. Have been doing it lately  in an ME2 I'm trying to get done before ME3 hits in fact.

I know that you have said that you used Gibbed's save editor to add minerals. The forum search won't wield anything, even if I try to find it.

You must be confusing me with somebody else. I've never even used Gibbed's save editor for anything, let alone adding minerals. The most I've changed in my ME2 is a Coalesced.ini file that added the extra outfits to my Shepard so I could get some more alternative casual outfits beyond two crap and two Cerberus get-ups (the formal look is nice, but best used on specific occasions rather than all the time, IMO). That's it.

Oh, I have also pulled the LotSB time change trick though, but by the time I did that, I'd researched all but a couple things anyway, since I almost always leave LotSB until second last.

[Reidbynature]

I think scanning might be somewhat better than last time. Scanning for various minerals was time consuming and annoying at times. Plus it felt somewhat forced on top of having shops and money for you to then scout for what was essentially a secondary currency. At least this way we're just following a guided scanner to whatever 'anomaly' it is we can pick up.

The 'toy ship' as some call it isn't the worst way to get around, but it's not the most exciting either. I can't help but wish that a future game in the Mass Effect universe could add some sectios where you could pilot a ship in 3D and possibly have space battles (which could net you resources) whilst traveling to different star systems.

[WizenSlinky0]

Wulfram wrote...

The pixel hunting was pretty silly too, yes.  Cutting that while retaining the basic system would have been the best solution.

Fuel was no real limitation.  And there really shouldn't be a resources or War Assets system, at least not one tied to a silly mini-game

Eh, I kinda have to agree with Phaey there. The current system is fairly important to how things work. It does not make sense to me to have the point and click style system from ME1 without modification at the very least. The game pretty much left you on the planet you were while you were searching, and finding, things in systems very far away. This didn't really make much sense.

While I agree the scale and quality of the map in ME2 and ME3 is fairly lacking (I can definitely see where the "toy" argument comes into play) it does serve the purpose of your ship actually being in the location you're searching.

As for fuel the costs were so negligible I can see why some would consider it pointless. There was no question asked of the player like "how do I make the most efficient use of my fuel". It was cheap as hell.

All in all I think space exploration could use for some more intricate transitions between states of moving/searching/locating. But the current mechanics of it are important for several reasons.

Adding pointless chase game doesn't seem likely to make it any more interesting.  Rather the opposite.

I'd say the reapers not attempting to stop you while you do your work would be a far more gamebreaking aspect, story wise. It'd really make no logical sense to me. Though, again they could probably use for some better transitions. Like a cutscene of a reaper bearing down on the normandy which breaks (realisticly) into a mini-game for evading it and escaping through the mass relay.

But since it's a bit late for that I'd say the system in place is superior to no system at all for the reapers engaging you while you move around.

I did not enjoy this feature is the most rational reason for scrapping it.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't mean that to sound as egotistical as it came off. The most rational reason for scrapping something that is sold to multiple people is, quite obviously, a feature that is not enjoyed by the majority of purchasers.

Not going into Reaper held territory at all for nonsensical scavenger hunts would be a lot better.  And when there's an actual reason to go into reaper held territory, handle it appropriately with cutscenes and whatnot, rather than routinely avoiding a couple of itty-bitty reapers in your toy Normandy.

I disagree. Whether youi want to consider them scavenger hunts or not does not change that fact lore-wise they are important. Maybe not to you. Maybe to you they are just fetch quests. But, if you're roleplaying, those kind of morale boosting artifacts are quite important when it comes to the galaxy.

Obviously it's impossible with the spread of the reaper invasion that we don't do things in reaper held territory. And while sure you could throw a cutscene down everytime you enter reaper territory I fail to see how it could be done without looking just as silly as you claim the normandy to be.

Once a reaper locks onto you, you're not staying in that system. Sorry but the stealth systems of the normandy have already proven to be inferior against reaper technology within a certain range (see the collectors). This means that as soon as a reaper knows your location you have to get out of the system to avoid being destroyed.

The cut scenes in this case would have to take place AFTER a mission to be plausible. However, this too makes things a bit silly. Can you really expect the normandy to fly around hostile space searching every system for this and that, before doing a mission or four, and no one takes notice?

Another option would be to maintain the normandy as-is but default to a cut scene when the reaper meter is full. This is plausible and acceptable but doesn't take into account distance as a factor. I believe the point of the on-map chase is to make you aware that reaching your limit at certain distances from the relay can lead to bad things happening.

Terror_K wrote...

[including one immediately from
moderator javierbegazo who says, "Very nice post, I agree with much of
what you said, and I look forward to see how varied the paths to the end
can be in ME3" then I'm not exactly sure what he's even going on about.

You really shouldn't include "moderator" ahead of his name if you want to point out his post to defend your own. While
I doubt many of us believe moderators to have anymore "authority" on
the subject of mass effect than the rest of us, some people might still
take their word higher than others.

Appeals to authority like that should try to be avoided in order to avoid undue influence on people.

Modifié par WizenSlinky0, 27 février 2012 - 02:07 .

[tmp7704]

Phaedon wrote...

Even so, to just scrap it would be even more irrational. You are one guy, you aren't necessarily among the majority, and to scrap an entire grinding system instead of improving its shortcomings is silly.

If you acknowledge the purpose of a system is to provide "grind", then it's in itself perfectly logical reason to remove it, right there.

("grind" is widely understood as 'tedious opposite of fun", i.e. pretty much the opposite what a game is supposed to provide)

Modifié par tmp7704, 27 février 2012 - 02:14 .

[Wulfram]

[quote]Phaedon wrote...

So "pixel hunting was pretty silly" is now a logical argument? Elaborate.[/quote]

You said why it was silly, I was agreeing with you.  It's like a bad point and click adventure game.

[quote]Of course, neither is "it would have been the best solution". Resource gathering through loot or mining (generally exploration) has been integrated in a lot of ME2's systems. Such as weapon customization.[/quote]

What?  There is no weapon customization in ME2?

The system works great without the need to go looking for minerals.  You're limited by finding the weapon upgrades in the game.

It's not like the resources were a real restriction anyway.  You could always find more than you needed, it was merely a matter of having to go through tedium.

[quote]A lot of ME1's systems (such as armor customization) could just not fit well with ME2's story, or generally wouldn't collaborate well with other systems. Predicting how the game would have been if the relationships between various gameplay systems was altered drastically is not very clever. Not unless you make an entire text wall about it. Imo.

You are essentially suggesting removing ME2's entire grinding system (ME1 had the text-pop thingy). This could have had unknown repercussions to the rest of the game.[/quote]

The repercussions aren't unknown.  I gave myself 500,000 of each resource.  It works great.

The fact that you call it a "grinding" system is a compelling argument to scrap it in and of itself.

[quote]Hem. You are forgetting the "argument" in "rational argument".

I think that fuel, even with infinite credits, was a very real limitation. I'll explain why.

Some clusters require several "trips", while still maintaing the risk of losing some minerals, and even if they weren't, here's another thing. You always have to go to the main system of a cluster to refuel and jump to another system. That essentially destroyed the possibility of button-mashing the left mouse button everytime you entered a system, since you had to fly to get to various points. And that took time.[/quote]

Not running out of fuel was trivially easy.

Wasting my time doesn't add a limitation, it just adds tedium.  My time should never be treated as an in game resource.

[quote]And why exactly shouldn't there be resources or War assets linked to that system? We know that just by doing the sidequests, you can unlock enough War Assets to get the perfect ending. So, why shouldn't the perfectionists be rewarded without any harm being caused to others? [/quote]

Because by denying me content, you are causing me harm.

[quote]You also just call the new system, "silly", not caring to explain why. Well, that's sort of the entire point of anything close to a debate in this thread and you dismiss it. Please elaborate.[/quote]

It's not something that it makes sense for Shepard to be doing.  He's an elite soldier, he's got vital missions to perform.  Wasting his time on trivial resource gathering should be considered a court-martial offense.

And a totally out of scale Normandy flying around in 2D is no representation of space travel.

[quote]Adding pointless chase game doesn't seem likely to make it any more interesting.  Rather the opposite.
[/quote]
You need to explain why it is pointless. You even imply that the opposite would occur. Your opinion is interesting and level-headed and whatnot, but you don't provide any arguments to support it.

I think the idea is brilliant. The only problem I had with mining is how slow-paced and risk-free it was. I believe that this complaint is pretty common. Otherwise, why would mining be "boring"?

The new system adds serious risk and makes the pace faster. Dozens of people have remarked that in this thread.

[quote]Emotions are irrational. They don't follow logic.[/quote]

Emotions are indeed irrational.  But, particularly when you're discussing a piece of entertainment, acting on them is entirely rational.

"This makes me unhappy, therefore I want it to stop" is rational even if the source of that rationality isn't.

[quote]Even so, to just scrap it would be even more irrational. You are one guy, you aren't necessarily among the majority, and to scrap an entire grinding system instead of improving its shortcomings is silly.[/quote]

I'm in the majority of people I'm speaking for, because I'm only speaking for me.

There's nothing of value to improve.  And again I'll note that in my opinion anything that can be referred to as a grinding system is something the game would probably be better off without.

[quote]Yes, the reason the Mako was removed was probably the community.[/quote]

Not sure of your point here.  Though I think the main problem with the Mako was that people didn't realise how skippable most of the tedious stuff was.  If you ignore the dumb grinding of medallions and resources, it's fine.


[quote]Cutscenes take a lot of space and they can get very repetitive after a while. That's why I don't support them.
[/quote]

Close encounters with the reapers shouldn't be so frequent as to get repetitive.  Not if they're to retain impact.

Modifié par Wulfram, 27 février 2012 - 02:14 .

[WoolyJoe]

Hello.

How's things?

[Il Divo]

Terror_K wrote...

JakePT wrote...

ME1 didn't have Ham Sandwiches, DDR elements or Superheroes. Way to strawman Priestley.

Actually, with a bit of CSI work, I think I found the former of those three...

What a great way to wake up to a new day. This picture just made my morning ten times better.

Modifié par Il Divo, 27 février 2012 - 02:14 .

[WizenSlinky0]

tmp7704 wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

Even so, to just scrap it would be even more irrational. You are one guy, you aren't necessarily among the majority, and to scrap an entire grinding system instead of improving its shortcomings is silly.

If you acknowledge the purpose of a system is to provide "grind", then it's in itself perfectly logical reason to remove it, right there.

("grind" is widely understood as 'tedious opposite of fun", i.e. pretty much the opposite what a game is supposed to provide)

Grinding is a mechanic. If grinding couldn't be fun then WoW would not exist.

Just like anything grinding can be done horribly horribly wrong or be used as a successful tool in the game.