176 réponses à ce sujet

[Bazedragon]

JustKnown2bDan wrote...

I wouldn't want that. The combat is too damn good, its challenging and just pure hectic when you have it on Insanity!

The best parts are the Conversations, characters and of course the story but without combat it probably wouldn't feel worthwhiled.

You see, this is why I say less combat, maybe fewer enemies, but more harder ones - more harbinger-collector thingies. Less grunts that serve only the purpose of making you move from cover if they're lucky enough to get beside you.

Of course, make it so enemy biotics could arch in the same way Sheps do, do that you don't just sit in cover and win - so more back to the ME1 system where shep can be caught in Stasis and the likes (though that does bug out on the Benezia fight) rather than just stagger backwards and then go "wait, did something just hit me? Oh well, back into cover!"

[Sierra 264]

Anyway, I'm off for the night, bye.

[Bazedragon]

Sierra 264 wrote...

Anyway, I'm off for the night, bye.

Sweet dreams (about tali!)

[Icinix]

Sierra 264 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Sierra 264 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Sierra 264 wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Sierra 264 wrote...
(SNIP)

Just because combat isn't your favourite part doesn't mean it isn't crucial. Being in there changing the tides of battle is very crucial and immersing.

...er....no. Its not for me and its not in my Mass Effect games. I play ME1 and ME2 games now with games so modded that its almost skipping the combat.

The combat for me is the LEAST immersive factor of all three games.

I'm pretty sure saving planets is quite immersive. But hey, opinions are opinions.

I don't believe in any Mass Effect 3 game I've saved a planet by shooting bullets during combat. I do believe they were done through the dialgoue and choice parts of the game.

So I guess defeating that Reaper on Rannoch meant...nothing? 

Personally? Could have been handled as a cutscene since I thought all the turret sequences were incredibly boring.

Can barely remember the combat, but remember the scenes and dialogue before and after the combat.

..but we're now debating MY enjoyment and MY immersion - when all I was ever saying is that the game DOESN'T need to have those direct combat sequences. I don't mind that they are there, but the game for me personally would have flowed just as well without them, and in some places better. Which is why I would have no issue with seeing an option to skip combat parts - I'm only going to mod ME3 once I'm done with it for future plays to make the combat easier than a hot knife cutting through cream.

If you really see no need or combat then why did you buy it? Why don't you just go on a bunch of interactive mass effect youtube videos?

..er...because I love the dialogue and choices and seeing how they pan out in the game world - and discovering and exploring the Mass Effect Galaxy in my own time?

Didn't I mention this in my first post about this?

[Eayn]

For what it's worth, I can see where you're coming from.  Non combat based games can work: Planescape: Torment, and The Longest Journey, to name two;  But that's not what Mass Effect is.  It's an interactive Space Opera with takly and shooty elements.  Trying to remove one or the other would break what made the original games so good. 

Recently, I've been trying to find a game that engages me as much as ME did.  And I can't find one.  I recently purchased Bioshock, after hearing that it was story driven.  Indeed, there is a story there, but after about 24 hours of play-time, having to wade through one nonsensical battle after another, I realised I wasn't enjoying it.  Too much shooty, not enough story -- or more to the point, the shooty has become the story. 

But you'll notice I'm not saying that combat is bad.  ME without combat would have been an incredibly weak game, IMO.  In my ideal game, combat would be there to drive the story along.  Fighting Grunt's thresher maw is story-driven; Invading the Cerberos base is story driven; Holding off waves of mooks while you wait for the Normandy to arrive in
the first few minutes of the game is not; having to kill Kai Leng wasn't.  He could have died in a cut-scene for all the difference it would have made to the story (not that cutscene deaths are bad: Mordin, Legion, et. al.).

Hmmm, I seem to have gone off on a tangent.  In summary:  I don't agree about a ME with no combat, nor do I want easier combat; what I want are battles that actually mean something in the context of the game.

[SalsaDMA]

BladyMZ wrote...

Topic-wise> when I finished ME1 for the first time I have never ever said I liked the combat, it came out after Rainbow Six Vegas and Gears of War, there was nothing there to hold my interest... except the story, the characters, the dialogue, the TRUE role playing, with Normandy Speeches, intervies etc.

Imagine THIS:

LA. Noire - like game with Garrus working in C-Sec, investigating various crimes, Dr. Heart included. Some action, but more like "chase him down" than "gun him down". Would love to see that. Could also mix some side-track mission on Omega, with Garrus working for some gang leaders "if I ever leave C-Sec I'm going to help people on Omega".

I loved LA Noire.

I remember the first time I played ME1 and went through the citadel, I felt fully immersed and it felt 'proper' that the action wasn't more forced than it was.

Then came ME2 and it became a string of skirmish scenarios, but the characters were at least still decent and somewhat believable.

Then came ME3 and I lost faith in Bioware.

[SalsaDMA]

Sierra 264 wrote...

I'm pretty sure saving planets is quite immersive. But hey, opinions are opinions.

You don't know what the word immersive means, do you?

Admit it

[lillitheris]

I think the Casual difficulty setting is perfectly fine, it allows you to just pretty much blaze through the combat for the good parts.

This, of course, assumes that the combat side doesn’t overshadow the other part which, sadly, was the case with ME3 (a little).

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

It would be a short movie made of some conversations and cut-scenes!

[augmented shephard]

I agree that the conversations and cut scenes are the best parts but I also enjoy Mass Effect's combat. Without both of them components it wouldn't really feel like a Mass Effect game.

[HellbirdIV]

Shooting bad guys is half the fun of Mass Effect. Why the hell would you cut out half the fun of it?

You might as well cut out all the dialogue and story and just have a bunch of linear shooting galleries with level progression. You just don't do that!

There is absolutely no reason why you should cut down on either. They both are needed to make the game what it is - if it was just walking around and talking and exploring, eventually it would get boring. Variety is a good thing!

[SNascimento]

Combat is one of the pillars of Mass Effect, so if you take it out ME collapses.

[SalsaDMA]

HellbirdIV wrote...

You might as well cut out all the dialogue and story and just have a bunch of linear shooting galleries with level progression. You just don't do that!

I thought was ME3? :innocent:

[napushenko]

SalsaDMA wrote...

HellbirdIV wrote...

You might as well cut out all the dialogue and story and just have a bunch of linear shooting galleries with level progression. You just don't do that!

I thought was ME3? :innocent:

you thought wrong 

[Fixers0]

napushenko wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

HellbirdIV wrote...

You might as well cut out all the dialogue and story and just have a bunch of linear shooting galleries with level progression. You just don't do that!

I thought was ME3? :innocent:

you thought wrong 

Clarify.

[Dont Kaidan Me]

HellbirdIV wrote...
Shooting bad guys is half the fun of Mass Effect. Why the hell would you cut out half the fun of it?

You might as well cut out all the dialogue and story and just have a
bunch of linear shooting galleries with level progression. You just
don't do that!

They did. They "dropped the ball" (admittedly) with Thane's character development...he's not even in the codex. Dialog options result in the same consequence regardless of whether you are an angel or a badass. The entire game is a bottleneck. I don't have the patience right now to list everything again, but there are oceans of posts detailing the "half" that was cut out.

Modifié par Dont Kaidan Me, 20 mai 2012 - 05:45 .

[AlanC9]

Eayn wrote...

For what it's worth, I can see where you're coming from.  Non combat based games can work: Planescape: Torment, and The Longest Journey, to name two;

Didn't PS:T have a fair amount of mandatory combat? Though I agree it's not about the combats in the same way that, say, BG2 is.

Modifié par AlanC9, 20 mai 2012 - 05:53 .

[spirosz]

Go see the movie then. Or read a book/fanfiction.

[Maderek]

The combat is an integral part of the Mass Effect experience, but, it's also probably the worst part. The combat in the ME trilogy is just absolutely mediocre, at best. BioWare has a long way to go when it comes to making a good shooter.

Still, without the combat, the conversations and story alone aren't enough to hold the game.

[sharkboy421]

I agree with the sentiment that Mass Effect wouldn't be Mass Effect without the combat.  One of the biggest reasons I love the series is because it has both fantastic story telling and great combat.  Yes there are some disconnects from time to time but over all it just fit for me.  After all, Shepard is soldier off to save the galaxy, she's not going to do that without having to fight.  And I found ME2 and ME3 combat to be some of the most fun I've had in games because it was really well done and it was part of this story that I loved so much.

[Little Princess Peach]

GenericEnemy wrote...

I would buy a game where you simply go around and interact with people in the universe in a heartbeat.

wait is that not real life?

[Pordis Shepard]

Tali-vas-normandy wrote...

GenericEnemy wrote...
I would buy a game where you simply go around and interact with people in the universe in a heartbeat.

wait is that not real life?

Lolno.  Real life requires afk!    ;P