134 réponses à ce sujet

[someone else]

napushenko wrote...
 what is difference between heavy and light armor ? 

Huh?  Welll it depends on the set - but there's clear difference in damage, shields and whatnot - but there's more diff between sets and from I-X if that's what your driving at.

[napushenko]

napushenko wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

napushenko wrote...

hours of exploration is the wrost thing in me 1.

I disagree.

Hell, I remember landing first time on a planet and thinking to myself: "Wow.. this is just like Star trek. I selected my 'away team' and I'm exploring this planet that actually looks like a planet..."

The fact that there were actually 'armors' that looked like they could keep out vacum sure helped, not to mention that there were hostile enviroments and different armors had different strengths (although I never used the suits that were catered to hostile enviroments much, usually bunkering down in my trusty mako till things were safe. But I can imagine those prefering to snipe stuff found more use for the armors that resisted hostile enviroments better)

In ME1 you actually felt like you were landing on planets in space. The next episodes there was really nothing that made you feel this was a space game anymore, aside some cardboard planks in the rear used as a stage-setup.

I dont need to jump over generic crappy mountains to know im in space, really.  i thought all aliens and futuristic cyberpunk areas are what reminded people that they are in space game. 

And i really dont know what youre talking about with armor. what different strengths ? and where were those suits that were catered to hostile enviromnets.  
there were 3 stats and all armors had them.  
altough i admit i miss having options to change companion armors in me 2, me 3 and da2. me 1 armors or weapons are very crappily done compared to some fantasy rpg-s like baldurs gate or nwn. 

so, its like i said, all armors have same 3 stats and only difference is variation between them ..  i wouldnt call that example of variety. 
so whats that difference between heavy and light armor everybody seems to know but mee ? 

Modifié par napushenko, 22 mai 2012 - 11:28 .

[someone else]

OP - my vote would be to do in hi-rez but I wouldn't change much (agree the generic dungeons could do with a bit of variety, and the inventory system...geez, if they'd only alpha-sort it, it would help a lot - the MP system would be a welcome addition.)

[Nozzivix]

Terror_K wrote...

It'll get rebooted in a decade or so, and turn Shepard into a dark, gritty emo while taking away choice entirely, filled with "live or die" quick-time events and flashy, over-the-top combat while over-dwelling on the darkness of the Reaper threat.

QUIET! QUIET! LALALALALALALALALALALLA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!

[SNascimento]

That isn't enough to make ME1 the best in the series... but it definitely improve it a lot. A LOT. A L O T.

[wolfsite]

I'd just be happy if the patched the current version of ME1 to make it more stable on newer systems (PC Version).  Also fix some of the sound problems.

[Harmless Crunch]

chengthao wrote...

Harmless Crunch wrote...

I'd definitely buy something like your describing OP but knowing EA...

EA doesn't own the rights to ME1 . . . . Microsoft does

Oh crap I completley forgot that.

[Captain_Obvious_au]

Absolutely! I'd love to see ME1 remade using ME3 combat, but I'd want everything else, including the Mako, left as they are in the original game.

It could also be improved by having a bit more variety to UNC world structures rather than the generic two buildings.

[Terror_K]

I have to add, to be honest, ME1 is already the best in the series.

[Captain_Obvious_au]

I don't know... in terms of story, ME1 is way out in front, the story is exceptional. For the rest of it though, I actually prefer ME2. I didn't like the gameplay when I started it but I love it now, it's much darker, better graphics, better gameplay.

[Terror_K]

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

I don't know... in terms of story, ME1 is way out in front, the story is exceptional. For the rest of it though, I actually prefer ME2. I didn't like the gameplay when I started it but I love it now, it's much darker, better graphics, better gameplay.

ME2 was just too watered-down, IMO. It started the "it's all about combat now" approach to things, moving away from the RPG roots and foundations of ME1 and switching to ones where the TPS side was dominant, which wasn't a good move. ME2's RPG elements were almost non-existent and its TPS elements were just too laclustre to really satisfy. Not to mention too many places felt so linear and small, they made the universe feel small and fake.

Granted, ME1 relied a little too much on old RPG tropes, and ME2 probably has the best actual roleplaying stuff in terms of dialogue choices, interrupts, Charm/Intimidate options, etc. (though even this is let down by the stupid self-feeding alignment system which almost breaks it), but ME2 was far too many steps in what could have been the right direction if handled better and not lost so much, but was clearly the wrong direction given where it went in the final part. ME3 had the best TPS combat by far, and did away with ME2's awfully linear level designs, but at the expense of pretty much all the things that made Mass Effect great.

As an experience goes and the complete package, ME1 is the clear winner, despite its clumsy design and weak combat. At least with ME1 BioWare seemed to know what was important, but that seemed to get pushed further and further into the background with the other two until all that seemed to matter in ME3 was the combat. ME1 at least tried to be an RPG and had some RPG ideals, even if it didn't quite pull them off. ME3 is just a story-driven shooter now, given the complete lack of dialogue, the linearity and complete lack of non-combat abilities.

I always kind of saw ME1 as a good framework for what could have potentially been a great series, had Bioware made the right moves and evolved the series properly. It's a shame that instead BioWare wasted and squandered ME1's potential and watered down or got rid of almost everything that indicated this potential to just make a series that in the end can't even really be called generic as a compliment. Instead it's a half-assed affair with its priorities so screwed up it almost doesn't resemble what the original game was going for at all, just so that BioWare could broaden their audience and appeal to the mainstream.

[Seifer006]

a real RPG is about deep-rich in Story & creative-gameplay.
 ie Final Fantasy IV,VI,VII,VIII, IX, and even X. I'll throw in the first Kingdom Hearts (not the others) and of course my favorite: Super Mario RPG: The Legend of The Seven Stars

Does it have depth? ME1,2 did. I though ME2 had much depth when came to character development. The gameplay was improved.

ME1 was very well done. Gameplay wise (yeah it wasn't the best) but we didn't complain to much about it until ME2 came out and realized how awful ME1 gameplay was.

The greatness is of ME1 and ME2 was the rich-story development. I got to go to Tutchanka and meet the Krogans (my favorite species in the ME Universe). I got to understand the genophage history. I got more understanding of the Salarians and why they chose to extract the Genophage.

Ceberus: ME1 - we were "hinted" of them. Was curious who they were? in ME2 we got to meet TIM (Martin Sheen fantastic job btw) and Miranda (which was my LI) and I thought BW did great job of introducing her to the story. We get more details on the Protheans. Most of the things were very well done in ME2 except............the awful ending. (wow sounds like ME3 all over again)

There's much more reasons on why I think ME1,2 are great.
Wrex, Grunt, Garrus, Kirahee, Zaeed Massani, Subject Zer0, Mirnada, Samaria, Thane, TIM, Harbinger (total bad****) Wreav etc...the characters were great

ME3 the whole game sucks. Sorry but when comes to RPG. ME3 isn't what I consider RPG. I see it as more FPS Acton game ie COD

BW sacrificed character development (except for Liara) but im not a fan of her. Im fan of Zaeed, Wrex, Grunt (these were my Team I chose back in ME1,2) , Harbinger TIM, Miranda, Subject Zer0, Samara Thane etc...

Where was my team I chose back in ME1 & 2 - why could't i bring Wrex back? Why wasn't there option for Grunt instead Im stuck with characters I don't like.

- Gameplay - I'll admit I like ME3 gameplay more (except for the auto-hugging on walls) this really needs to be fixed. If you're like me, who plays Gold MP or Insanity SP - the auto-hugging on walls screws the player over.

Anyway - that's my opinion. You can rant and rave all you want on me, telling me I'm wrong. I don't care. I know what real RPG's games are (look above). These are the ones I grew and love.

[XDRonin]

Love the idea, so long as to Bioware only improves (or rather Updates) the graphics & combat system to ME3 standards. And! that Bioware DON'T! add a space-child ending to ME1.

[mauro2222]

Captain_Obvious_au wrote...

I don't know... in terms of story, ME1 is way out in front, the story is exceptional. For the rest of it though, I actually prefer ME2. I didn't like the gameplay when I started it but I love it now, it's much darker, better graphics, better gameplay.

Why people say that? I don't see it any darker. Care to explain? Maybe my definition is wrong.

[napushenko]

jreezy wrote...

napushenko wrote...

so, its like i said, all armors have same 3 stats and only difference is variation between them ..  i wouldnt call that example of variety. 

You wouldn't call an example of variety "variety"? Uh...what?

so you consider having varied 3 stats between all armor in the game a shining example of variety for all other games to behold ? 

btw, you havent answered my simple question. or it is that heavy armor has better 3 stats than light armor. so much variety. artistic vision.  did you even played the game ? 

Modifié par napushenko, 23 mai 2012 - 07:45 .

[Jerjud45]

Mass Effect 1 is already the best game in the trilogy, it doesn't need to be remade.

[mauro2222]

napushenko wrote...

jreezy wrote...

napushenko wrote...

so, its like i said, all armors have same 3 stats and only difference is variation between them ..  i wouldnt call that example of variety. 

You wouldn't call an example of variety "variety"? Uh...what?

so you consider having varied 3 stats between all armor in the game a shining example of variety for all other games to behold ? 

btw, you havent answered my simple question. or it is that heavy armor has better 3 stats than light armor. so much variety. artistic vision.  did you even played the game ?

LOL stop lying, you say you played the game twice, but you never noticed that certain armors were locked to you, you never noticed how heavy is more bulky than light (the extra layers of protection are so visible even a blind person could see them), you never noticed the word heavy-medium-light armor next to the name, you never noticed that Kaidan can't wear medium or heavy, you never noticed that Tali can't have medium or heavy, you never noticed that adepts can't wear medium or heavy... please dude.

Modifié par mauro2222, 23 mai 2012 - 08:06 .

[kalle90]

napushenko wrote...

kalle90 wrote...

Things ME1 gameplay had over ME2/ME3
1. Crouching. It allows me to become a smaller target, use improvised cover and improve accuracy. More control and more badassery.
2. Weapon skills. They were overdone in ME1, but RPG needs weapon skills. It was awesome a guy who can barely hit the side of a barn became a deadly sharpshooter. And it added more options to spend points.
3. Biotics. You could be a pure biotic who owns everyone with his magic powers, instead of having 1 or tops 2 worthwhile biotics coupled with a gun.
4. No heatsinks. Yes some mods were overpowered, but it was interesting to craft my weapons to be able to shoot more bullets at the cost of power or accuracy. Also the quick thinking of "will I kill that enemy and have my gun jammed, or will I cease to cool down for a second"

Agree on all but 4th. 

It was more anoying and it makes sense to develop heat sinks because how many people found their death going all gun blazing just to hear that pi pi pi sound and their enemies laughing at them. 
Why the problem with heatsinks, they are more fun and make sense in story, gameplay perspective. Even the descriptions in ME 1 of some weapons told that ammunition or something like ammunition is there and that the gun because of the heat system can hold couple of hundred slugs more then normal weapons till it expends. We never got that  in the game. 

ME1 way is more unique, although some games have used similiar system. Ammo clips are in 99% of games.

You could customize your gun to be able to shoot more shots at the expense of power or range, or less shots with increased power or range. Sure ME3 mods achieve it in a sense, but you still only get 12 shots or 15 shots before having to load. Pacing of shots doesn't matter.

The concept of heatsinks. Firing 1 shot and then waiting a bit logically doesn't heat anything a lot. Holding the trigger down and firing 20 shots on the other hand sounds very straining to the gun. Not to mention that ME1 weapons had infinite ammo, which is superior to pretty much anything. To me lorewise it would have made sense if we were able to "reload" in case our weapon overheats (if we had spare clips). Thermal clips of ME2/3 don't feel like thermal sinks at all, they're just ammo clips with x amount of bullets.

IMO it's exciting to constantly think how heated up my gun is exactly. Sometimes it can even be smart not to shoot at the enemy although he is shooting at me. Going in guns blazing and dying is the player's fault. But that's probably the exact reason why the system changed - people are not accustomed to having original gameplay. And the new Bioware does anything not to alienate the common gamer, giving up their originality while at it.

[Manton-X2]

napushenko wrote...
And i really dont know what youre talking about with armor. what different strengths ? and where were those suits that were catered to hostile enviromnets.  
there were 3 stats and all armors had them.  
altough i admit i miss having options to change companion armors in me 2, me 3 and da2. me 1 armors or weapons are very crappily done compared to some fantasy rpg-s like baldurs gate or nwn. 

I haven't played Mass Effect in a long time and I still know that armor had far more variety than you're talking about.  Light armor gave you least movement and weapon accuracy penalty.  As you went up to medium and heavy, your protection increased but your movement and weapon accuracy suffered.  

I loved the ME armor system.  The ability to customize your armor ... medical packs and interfaces; different kinds of plating (armor, ablative, etc.); mechanical upgrades like motorized joints or combat exoskeletons; shielding/barrier tech upgrades; environmental seals; etc.  And all with different levels for customization.

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Ugh, the ME1 armour system. It always took me half the game to find a single quarian armour.

Yea, that was kind of annoying but it also made perfect in-game sense.  Why would anyone even bother to build and market Quarian armor?  Most Quarians outside the flotilla were poor and on pilgrimage.  Not a lot of profit to be had there.

Modifié par Manton-X2, 23 mai 2012 - 09:05 .

[napushenko]

mauro2222 wrote...

napushenko wrote...

jreezy wrote...

napushenko wrote...

so, its like i said, all armors have same 3 stats and only difference is variation between them ..  i wouldnt call that example of variety. 

You wouldn't call an example of variety "variety"? Uh...what?

so you consider having varied 3 stats between all armor in the game a shining example of variety for all other games to behold ? 

btw, you havent answered my simple question. or it is that heavy armor has better 3 stats than light armor. so much variety. artistic vision.  did you even played the game ?

LOL stop lying, you say you played the game twice, but you never noticed that certain armors were locked to you, you never noticed how heavy is more bulky than light (the extra layers of protection are so visible even a blind person could see them), you never noticed the word heavy-medium-light armor next to the name, you never noticed that Kaidan can't wear medium or heavy, you never noticed that Tali can't have medium or heavy, you never noticed that adepts can't wear medium or heavy... please dude.

no armor was locked to me. what are you talking about ? and even if it does, what that has to do with armor difference. is that locked armor more special then other ones. does it give me some new stats ? 

bulky ?! what does bulky have to do with gameplay. bulky does what exactly ? word heavy does what exactly ? 
so you listed all members who cant wear some of the armor. your point is what exactly ? 

is it or is it not that all armor have same 3 stats. and only armor difference in the game is variation between those stats. nevermind if its heavy, medium, or light. neither one differentiate from the other one. except bulkyness i guess. heavy armor generally have better stats then light. and thats that. 

even me 3 gives you more of those stats and skill influences then me 1. 

Modifié par napushenko, 23 mai 2012 - 09:05 .

[kumquats]

Yeah, I mean in ME1 you HAVE to shoot, with a crappy combatsystem.
ME3 on Insanity, you can only use biotics and never fire a single shot. ME1 is more a shooter, then the other games.

Why is it that a lot of people glorify ME1 gameplay wise, lootwise and don't even remind me of the horror machine that is the Mako.... Even the loot is ridiculous, you only use Spectre Weapons, everything else is just for money, you never use 70% of the armor. Some of the high lvl armor have the same stats. While in ME2 and ME3, you can make combinations and choose the color you like.

In my first run I did choose the Infiltrator, it's so amazing and realistic, when your ELITE n7 Soldier holds his gun like a drunken Sailor.

[napushenko]

Manton-X2 wrote...

napushenko wrote...
And i really dont know what youre talking about with armor. what different strengths ? and where were those suits that were catered to hostile enviromnets.  
there were 3 stats and all armors had them.  
altough i admit i miss having options to change companion armors in me 2, me 3 and da2. me 1 armors or weapons are very crappily done compared to some fantasy rpg-s like baldurs gate or nwn. 

I haven't played Mass Effect in a long time and I still know that armor had far more variety than you're talking about.  Light armor gave you least movement and weapon accuracy penalty.  As you went up to medium and heavy, your protection increased but your movement and weapon accuracy suffered.  

I loved the ME armor system.  The ability to customize your armor ... medical packs and interfaces; different kinds of plating (armor, ablative, etc.); mechanical upgrades like motorized joints or combat exoskeletons; shielding/barrier tech upgrades; environmental seals; etc.  And all with different levels for customization.

i didnt saw any notable influences on movement and accuracy.  i played with soldier and vanguard. so i used all 3 armor types. 
there isnt any description that .. 
ok, it seems you are right. i just checked me wikia. 
but there isnt any ingame description that tells me light armor was in any case different then heavy armor but stats.  

[Manton-X2]

kumquats wrote...

Yeah, I mean in ME1 you HAVE to shoot, with a crappy combatsystem.
ME3 on Insanity, you can only use biotics and never fire a single shot. ME1 is more a shooter, then the other games.

Or you could properly equip and spec Liara and Tali, walk into a battle, find cover, go grab a soda, come back and wait for the noise to die down as they floated and exploded everything around the room.  There were entire missions in later playthroughs where I never fired a shot.

[Manton-X2]

napushenko wrote...
i didnt saw any notable influences on movement and accuracy.  i played with soldier and vanguard. so i used all 3 armor types. 
there isnt any description that .. 
ok, it seems you are right. i just checked me wikia. 
but there isnt any ingame description that tells me light armor was in any case different then heavy armor but stats.  

Well, yea ... but did they really need to tell you.  It's pretty much implied in the names.

It would be like I told you there were light, medium and heavy gloves.  Light were driving gloves, medium were ski gloves and heavy were welding gloves.  Then I told you that after you put on a pair we were going to go out and shoot a gun, you'd have a pretty good idea that the heavier the glove, the more difficult it would be to use and aim the gun.

Same concept with the armor.