181 réponses à ce sujet

[MILK FOR THE KHORNE FLAKES]

Phaedon wrote...
Frankly, it's difficult to find this simplified mechanic in any other AAA game post-2007.

YOU MEAN OTHER THAN IN SKYRIM, DIABLO III, WITCHER 2, DRAGON AGE 2, BORDERLANDS, FFXIII, ETC?

[Phaedon]

LKx wrote...
It was never about being intellectually smart(ass) to Riemann level...

What is a Riemann level? Is it edible?

[SalsaDMA]

Phaedon wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...
You seem stuck in this perception that rpg = combat. Almost the same as the other dude that thought it was a "waste" to put skilpoints into >conversations<.

No, I rather seem to be stuck in the perception that Pokemon is more intellectually demanding that ME1 in every way. Never in that post did I narrow it down to combat.

Frankly, I get a better rpg experience from LA Noire than I do from the latter episodes of ME, even though there are zero actual skills in LA Noire. Reason: Playing the character isn't dumbed down to fighting random mooks.

Frankly, I doubt you have played LA Noire recently. The plot is poor, full of inconsistencies, and you get in fights for little logical reason. In fact, its side missions are so generic and so directed at fighting 'random mooks' that a good percentage of them is based on the format of 'Something something BANDITS'. 

Note that I am only touching on the surface here. I won't go into the problems with you considering that you roleplay in LA Noire.

I'll still claim ME2 and ME3 are shooters and not rpgs.

Of course you will.

Actually I did play LA Noire recently. As any rockstar game I figured it would be full of bugs on release so waited till I could get it on sale, hopefully patched from the worst bugs

The random mooks you talk about are equilevant to scanning in ME. You don't need to do them if you don't want to, and even so, not all are 'fighting' but a mix of different situations. And "something something bandits"? Um... You ARE aware that the sidemissions are basicly 911 calls you respond to, as a cop, right? You expected the sidemissions to be dating shows or something?

As far as the plot... It's no classic in as far as the story goes, but let us be honest, neither is ME. Even so, it doesn't change that it still provides a better immersion with playing the character as a character than ME does. ME2 and especially ME3 prioritizes combat over anything else, while LA Noire prioritizes talking with people and looking for clues over combat. It still sprinkles with combat here and there, but it doesn't feel as forced as ME does (Not to mention you can skip combat entirely if you want to).

[Phaedon]

MILK FOR THE KHORNE FLAKES wrote...

Phaedon wrote...
Frankly, it's difficult to find this simplified mechanic in any other AAA game post-2007.

YOU MEAN OTHER THAN IN SKYRIM, DIABLO III, WITCHER 2, DRAGON AGE 2, BORDERLANDS, FFXIII, ETC?

No, I don't. Out of the games from this list that I have played, all have situations where X is better than Y and other where Y is better than X. As long as X, and Y are in the same tier.

Sure there are exceptions, and there in fact are godweapons that are significantly better than anything else once you finish progressing. But I can't think of a single title replicating ME1's progression system.

[SalsaDMA]

Phaedon wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...
entirely different discussion.

Now you are discussing whether people prefer slow graded progress (more realistic, but feels boring to some), or big leaps of improvement in discernable 'blocks' (not very realistic, but some people prefer seing changes in big chunks)

Of course I do.

When someone switches the topic from mental requirement to quality of reward, I won't reply with something relevant to the original topic.

(Did you read his post?)

No, I just wanted to take a jab at you.

(That's what you wanted to hear, isn't it? )

[Aifell_Ellion]

Phaedon wrote...

First of ME3's MP is hardly traditional MP and has nothing with what we were previously discussing. Moreover, you apparently consider aspects of ME1  to be intellectually demanding, when in fact ME3's MP, with the exception of dialogue choice has all of them. Statistical progression, tactical use of powers, different classes/builds, etc.

Agreed. ME3 mp allows you wide choice of strategies, reqiures tactical awareness, so the result of a game is more often dependable on how good you are preared and how smart yoa are, than on how good you shoot.
Just to make sure we speak about one game: i'm talking about gold challange, and not FBWGG.

[Zhuinden]

LKx wrote...

Trying to forget about ME3, i'm forcing myself to replay ME1...
Yes, it's a bit rusty, and the inventory is a bit annoying (mostly because of its design, it could have been a lot better with a better GUI), but i'm realizing how much ME2&ME3 are dumbed down compared to it.

In ME3 they've tryied to have it a little less semplified than ME2, with the weapons upgrades&weight, but i still consider it very weak... i mean, in ME you had several different armors and you could change it on any of your squadmates!

And what about the ME3's oversimplified dialogues AND autodialogues?

So, do you think that it's a good or a bad thing that they are dumbing down their games?
And why they are doing that?

Simple.

They can sell it for the same value, but it costs less to produce.

That's all.

[L. Han]

Well what I liked about ME1 is loot, but the inventory management was horrible. Also I was hoping for multiple ways of finishing a mission. Example: Noveria. You can just go up and hack the door and kill everyone OR you can go help Dr.Cohen or something and get an access key to sneak behind and finish the mission without bloodshed.

[SalsaDMA]

Methaluan_Sylver wrote...

People are getting spoiled with to much easy stuff in general. In a few years shooter will have auto target and a record voice that every five second say "you are the best player of nowdays, buy the DLC to be the best of all time".

I thought this was already true on consoles and poor ports?

Heck, the voices already started back when I was playing Unreal Tournemant I seem to recall... Or was it Quake that brougth those? It has been a while...

[Epic777]

The true answer to this thread is : SPAM BIOTICS

[SalsaDMA]

Phaedon wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...
Horde mode sure isn't intelectually challenging.

And considering that I) nowhere in his post did he talk about horde mode, II) I have yet to have the chance to touch ME3 or multiplayer, you find it rational to reply, criticising ME3's MP.

-'So, I don't really like the mechanics of Rome Total Wa-'
-'The Roman civilization is proof that democracy doesn't work!!!!!!!"

You would have a point if MP in ME3 had been along the lines of strategic modes in the BF series (hold and capture multiple points, conquest if played right) against other humans, but that's not exactly what ME3 mp is about, is it?

Heck, something along the lines of battlezone could work too, but again, a bit off from what ME3 tries to do.

Had you not missed the point of the two previous posts, your post would still be flawed.

First of ME3's MP is hardly traditional MP and has nothing with what we were previously discussing. Moreover, you apparently consider aspects of ME1  to be intellectually demanding, when in fact ME3's MP, with the exception of dialogue choice has all of them. Statistical progression, tactical use of powers, different classes/builds, etc.

Can you make up your mind of wether you are talking about ME3 Mp or not?

And you are still having that tone of trying to condescend people that actually liked ME1. Please point out where I said it was intelectually demanding. Stuff doesn't need to be that to be fun or interesting, but please do not try and claim that ME2 or ME3 has any leg on ME1 in that regard when they are guiding you down a straigth tunnel of playstyles as compared to different appraoches in ME1. The fact that you pulled MP into it just shows you have a tendency to focus on combat rather than the 'whole' package

[SalsaDMA]

Phaedon wrote...

Do you feel disappointed in me?

Yes, now go into the corner and wear your hat:police:

[Phaedon]

SalsaDMA wrote...
Actually I did play LA Noire recently. As any rockstar game I figured it would be full of bugs on release so waited till I could get it on sale, hopefully patched from the worst bugs

The random mooks you talk about are equilevant to scanning in ME. You don't need to do them if you don't want to, and even so, not all are 'fighting' but a mix of different situations.

Does any of this stop them from existing or having plot behind them? If you want to disregard all sidemissions, then I'll go ahead and say that nowhere in the trilogy do you fight  enemies without a plotpoint behind it.

And "something something bandits"? Um... You ARE aware that the sidemissions are basicly 911 calls you respond to, as a cop, right? You expected the sidemissions to be dating shows or something?

Is there a law that says that all realistic sidemissions have to be titled 'Something something bandits'?

On your second point, don't be ridiculous. There are excellent examples of LA Noire dispatches actually having plot behind them. And there are some where you just go from Point A to Point B and you're just opened fire upon.

I am still creeped out by that 70-year old having a 25-year old cheating girlfriend.

As far as the plot... It's no classic in as far as the story goes, but let us be honest, neither is ME.

Sure, in your opinion. I managed to enjoy LA Noire, but that doesn't mean that its plot isn't poor. And I don't think that for any of the MEs.

Even so, it doesn't change that it still provides a better immersion with playing the character as a character than ME does. ME2 and especially ME3 prioritizes combat over anything else, while LA Noire prioritizes talking with people and looking for clues over combat. It still sprinkles with combat here and there, but it doesn't feel as forced as ME does (Not to mention you can skip combat entirely if you want to).

Well, let's see- LA Noire is about being a detective, whereas ME3 is about being a commando in midst of the greatest and bloodiest war in galactic history.

And yet, at the same time, ME2/3 takes great focus on the characters, and even allow you to casually walk around locations, interacting with the enviroment and NPCs. LA Noire, for giving you a role so closely tied with talking to people has little to none interaction with other characters out of the main plot.

[Sidney]

LKx wrote...

Trying to forget about ME3, i'm forcing myself to replay ME1...
Yes, it's a bit rusty, and the inventory is a bit annoying (mostly because of its design, it could have been a lot better with a better GUI), but i'm realizing how much ME2&ME3 are dumbed down compared to it.

Congrats, you sir,  alone among the drooling masses figured out that the Specter Weapons were better than all other guns AND I bet you are the sort of intellectual titan who figured out that a Specter X was better than a Specter IX gun. God bless you saving us all from idiocy.

There is no great intllectual achievement to figure out that X > Y which is all the complex inventory management of ME1 asks you to do in a badly awkward way. Maybe that taxes you but for everyone over 2nd grade that no longer rises to the level of a challenge. ME2 asked you to do something much harder, make a selection in which there was no "best" option. I can see how that would frustrate you and you X>Y mind.

[Aifell_Ellion]

Phaedon wrote...

Aifell_Ellion wrote...
What about armor and omnitool? It seems to me that there were examples of armor with more shields, but lesser physical protection(or how it was called, sorry had localized copy), and vice versa.

It's the same progression system.

Wait. Wasnt it like that:
 1. HMWA X better than AVENGER X and f.e. HURRICANE X
 2. HMWA X is harder to get (more rare, more expensive) than both avenger and hurricane
 3. HURRICANE X and AVENGER X are same price, same rarity.
 4. HURRICANE X has more damage than AVENGER X, but AVENGER X has higer rate of fire than HURRICANE X, making them equal in average damage per second
 Isn't it in like that in all other games?! more rare and more expensive weapons are better in all situations, and only at the same level there is difference?!

[SalsaDMA]

Phaedon wrote...

Aifell_Ellion wrote...
What about armor and omnitool? It seems to me that there were examples of armor with more shields, but lesser physical protection(or how it was called, sorry had localized copy), and vice versa.

It's the same progression system.

I think you are misunderstanding him.

There were 'shield' armors and 'armor' armors. But a "Armor of cool III" would always be better than "Armor of cool II" That much is correct. Different armors had different slots too, and the mods you could put in those slots could vary the overall effect your armor had as well. Slot in mods that increased cd speed so you could use abilities more often (for example) or slot in more shield power or even health generation (2 other examples, of which the latter was just defaulted into everyone in ME2 and ME3)

[Phaedon]

SalsaDMA wrote...
Can you make up your mind of wether you are talking about ME3 Mp or not?

I wasn't. Now that you talk about it, I will too, even with the limited information I have on it. That is sort of what I spent half a paragraph in my previous posts trying to explain to you.

And you are still having that tone of trying to condescend people that actually liked ME1.

Hey, hey. I actually liked ME1. I don't like insulting myself, so I don't do it. Therefore, as hard as you try to spin it, 'some' still differs than 'all', especially when I attribute a specific property to the former.

Please point out where I said it was intelectually demanding. Stuff doesn't need to be that to be fun or interesting, but please do not try and claim that ME2 or ME3 has any leg on ME1 in that regard when they are guiding you down a straigth tunnel of playstyles as compared to different appraoches in ME1.

No, I'll actually go ahead and say that both item progression and statistical progression in ME1 doesn't come close to the one in ME2 or 3. There is zero item variety in ME1, and no matter what you do in statistical progression, it won't matter. It doesn't reward micromanaging. It just encourages you to dump a lot of points into a single stat in order to emulate the system of 2 or 3.

The fact that you pulled MP into it just shows you have a tendency to focus on combat rather than the 'whole' package

Bueno historia, compadre.

I have faith that you are able to read previous posts, and that alone will show that I replied on someone dissing on MP in general. You on the other hand, use it as an argument about the intellectual difficulty of the game. (!)

Really, that's one poor attempt of 'invoking against the argumenter' if I have every seen one.

[SalsaDMA]

Phaedon wrote...

MILK FOR THE KHORNE FLAKES wrote...

Phaedon wrote...
Frankly, it's difficult to find this simplified mechanic in any other AAA game post-2007.

YOU MEAN OTHER THAN IN SKYRIM, DIABLO III, WITCHER 2, DRAGON AGE 2, BORDERLANDS, FFXIII, ETC?

No, I don't. Out of the games from this list that I have played, all have situations where X is better than Y and other where Y is better than X. As long as X, and Y are in the same tier.

Sure there are exceptions, and there in fact are godweapons that are significantly better than anything else once you finish progressing. But I can't think of a single title replicating ME1's progression system.

Eh... are you saying that a sniper rifle played the same as a pistol?

Or are you saying that there weren't mods for the weapons that tailored to different playstyles (target specific ammo, sprayer or hardhitter, accuracy etc.)

Cause getting higher level weapons in any lootgame means higher level damage. That's not restricted to ME1.

[MILK FOR THE KHORNE FLAKES]

Phaedon wrote...

MILK FOR THE KHORNE FLAKES wrote...

Phaedon wrote...
Frankly, it's difficult to find this simplified mechanic in any other AAA game post-2007.

YOU MEAN OTHER THAN IN SKYRIM, DIABLO III, WITCHER 2, DRAGON AGE 2, BORDERLANDS, FFXIII, ETC?

No, I don't. Out of the games from this list that I have played, all have situations where X is better than Y and other where Y is better than X. As long as X, and Y are in the same tier.

Sure there are exceptions, and there in fact are godweapons that are significantly better than anything else once you finish progressing. But I can't think of a single title replicating ME1's progression system.

I THINK IT'S THE OTHER WAY AROUND. IT'S VERY COMMON IN RPGS (OR ACTION GAMES WITH RPG ELEMENTS) FOR ITEMS OF A PARTICULAR TYPE AND SUBTYPE TO BE STRAIGHT UPGRADES.

I DON'T SEE A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ME1'S "HEY, THIS GUN BY MANUFACURER X IS BETTER THAN THE GUN BY MANUFACTURER X I ALREADY HAVE IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY!" AND MORROWIND'S "HEY, THIS DAEDRIC LONGSWORD IS BETTER THAN THIS IRON LONGSWORD IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY!"

IT'S A QUESTIONABLE DESIGN PHILOSOPHY, BUT THAT'S RPGS FOR YOU.

[ashwind]

One of the reasons games are... "less", especially CRPG is because developers did not have to worry about making a game that would fit into a console. There is only so much a console can take before it explodes with its seriously dated hardware. So, games are dumb down because they have to fit into less than sufficient hardware.

Before any console player stone me to death, you are not safe for long because in the very near future, developers will make games for your console that must also fits in iPad and iPhone.

=P

[Phaedon]

[quote]Aifell_Ellion wrote...
ait. Wasnt it like that:

-snip-[/quote]
Um, I hope it wouldn't be.

For starters, ME2 alone, regardless of the price or the difficulty in gaining each weapon, had varying stats.
The Avenger wasn't better in all situations that the Vindicator, etc. Even the weapons from the Collector Ship had disadvantages in comparison to more basic weapons.


[/quote]

[quote]SalsaDMA wrote...
I think you are misunderstanding him.[/quote]
No. You are the only one pulling upgrades and mods into these, which were poor compared to even shooters such as BF3.

[LKx]

Sidney wrote...

Congrats, you sir,  alone among the drooling masses figured out that the Specter Weapons were better than all other guns AND I bet you are the sort of intellectual titan who figured out that a Specter X was better than a Specter IX gun. God bless you saving us all from idiocy.

There is no great intllectual achievement to figure out that X > Y which is all the complex inventory management of ME1 asks you to do in a badly awkward way. Maybe that taxes you but for everyone over 2nd grade that no longer rises to the level of a challenge. ME2 asked you to do something much harder, make a selection in which there was no "best" option. I can see how that would frustrate you and you X>Y mind.

Do you know that there were differently balanced armors and ammos, and you don't begin the game with the top gear avaible, don't you?

And if you're saying that high end gear in a game tends usually to be vastly superior to anything before it, well, we can agree on that, never said that ME1 itself was perfect...

[Maias227]

Try some of Paradox's latest games and tell me they've dumbed down anything. Just the freaking turtorial takes an hour and barely covers half!

[SalsaDMA]

Aifell_Ellion wrote...

Phaedon wrote...

Aifell_Ellion wrote...
What about armor and omnitool? It seems to me that there were examples of armor with more shields, but lesser physical protection(or how it was called, sorry had localized copy), and vice versa.

It's the same progression system.

Wait. Wasnt it like that:
 1. HMWA X better than AVENGER X and f.e. HURRICANE X
 2. HMWA X is harder to get (more rare, more expensive) than both avenger and hurricane
 3. HURRICANE X and AVENGER X are same price, same rarity.
 4. HURRICANE X has more damage than AVENGER X, but AVENGER X has higer rate of fire than HURRICANE X, making them equal in average damage per second
 Isn't it in like that in all other games?! more rare and more expensive weapons are better in all situations, and only at the same level there is difference?!

It was. The problem was, though (and I agree the spectre weapons were a balancing issue for that game), that spectre weapons unlocked based on how much money you had earned while playing the game (as I seem to recall). While this wasn't too big an issue in the first playthrough, it made subsequent playthroughs more of a joke combatwise, as the spectre weapons were unlocked to start with then.

[spirosz]

Phaedon wrote...

eternalnightmare13 wrote...
Child, please.  Everything after that brat Alexander the Great ''solved'' the Gordian knot  everything else was dumbed down...

Of course, if you consider sitting in front of a puzzle for hours and ending up with slashing it to bits with a sword as smart, it is logical that you consider ME1 an intellectually demanding game as well.

Ahahaha!