5257 réponses à ce sujet

[Syuvial]

xmeduo wrote...

Bioware... just get rid of thermal clips for the next game!!! Bring back overheating weapons(ME1 weapons)

Oh god, i hope not. Give me thermals any day. 

[xmeduo]

Syuvial wrote...

xmeduo wrote...

Bioware... just get rid of thermal clips for the next game!!! Bring back overheating weapons(ME1 weapons)

Oh god, i hope not. Give me thermals any day. 

No, adding thermal clips only contributed to the Gearsification of Mass Effect.

When they put thermal clips in ME2 that added reloading..... reloading WHY AM I STILL RELOADING. I liked ME1 becuase it actually felt futuristic that we reached a point where we didnt need to carry ammo and it was awesome!!! Dont you realise that Mass Effect 1 is the only reason that the ME universe could expand to what it is now...... Me3 is terrible compared to Me1 but still.

So its around 2183 we are in the 22nd century.... and you have guns that do not EVER run out of ammo..... then you decide to add Thermal Clips and only a limited number of these can be carried. What a great idea!!! It sounds ike a good idea to downgrade a weapon and take a step BACKWARDS. So when I have Krogan Warlord is charging me and I have no thermal clips.... instead of backing up and waiting for my gun to cool down I get wrecked.

In ME1 my assault rifle and pistol would NEVER overheat it was super efficient. You had the ability to totally change the dynamics of a weapon. My ME1 my shotgun could be a quick firing beast in close quarters... or I could tighten the spread add damage and make it like a Claymore..... that fires slugs.

Funny thing is ME3 weapon mods look like cut and paste arts and craft's.

Modifié par xmeduo, 25 mars 2013 - 06:39 .

[Syuvial]

xmeduo wrote...

Syuvial wrote...

xmeduo wrote...

Bioware... just get rid of thermal clips for the next game!!! Bring back overheating weapons(ME1 weapons)

Oh god, i hope not. Give me thermals any day. 

No, adding thermal clips only contributed to the Gearsification of Mass Effect.

 

It was a bad mechanic that felt clumsy, and left strong weapons too overpowered, while weaker ones became useless. The fact that other games use a similar system is irrlevant.

When they put thermal clips in ME2 that added reloading..... reloading WHY AM I STILL RELOADING. I liked ME1 becuase it actually felt futuristic that we reached a point where we didnt need to carry ammo and it was awesome!!! Dont you realise that Mass Effect 1 is the only reason that the ME universe could expand to what it is now...... Me3 is terrible compared to Me1 but still.

Ammo had nothing to do with it. Effective world building and good writing are what drove Mass Effect into popularity. That does not mean that everything about the game was good.

So its around 2183 we are in the 22nd century.... and you have guns that do not EVER run out of ammo..... then you decide to add Thermal Clips and only a limited number of these can be carried. What a great idea!!! It sounds ike a good idea to downgrade a weapon and take a step BACKWARDS. So when I have Krogan Warlord is charging me and I have no thermal clips.... instead of backing up and waiting for my gun to cool down I get wrecked.

You say it's a step backwards, but it's a lot more practical from my angle. Switching to disposable heat sinks means more shots per minute, since you don't need to wait for weapon cooldown. It also allows you to make stronger weapons, since the risk of damaging a heat sink isn't a problem, whereas with integrated heat sinks, if you damage it, you just lost your gun. the universal nature of thermal clips also means that any soldier with a good head on their shoulders isn't going to run out of ammo in any realistic situation. 

In ME1 my assault rifle and pistol would NEVER overheat it was super efficient. You had the ability to totally change the dynamics of a weapon. My ME1 my shotgun could be a quick firing beast in close quarters... or I could tighten the spread add damage and make it like a Claymore..... that fires slugs.

What's your point? In ME3 my Suppressor/Harrier/Locust loadout never ran out of ammo, was significantly more modable, and could drop brutes or even banshees in no time flat.

Funny thing is ME3 weapon mods look like cut and paste arts and craft's.

That's got nothing to do with thermal clips though. That's more about visual fidelity than anything else.

[jack253]

What I would like to see is a game that takes place during the krogan rebellions. The way I see it work is:

• The player can choose between turian, asari and salarian each with it's own Origin story to give background to the player beyond a choice between three options.
• Sinds it takes place long before the humans step up to the plate, it won't be a human focussed game.
• The game can take place over the whole ten years of the rebellion showing how the situation becomes more and more desperate as the conflict goes on. (I know that this was done in DA2, and I'm not going to argue about this or the storytelling in DA2)
• the rise of the spectres
• the chance of meeting a younger wrex.
• the question of whether or not the player would unleash the genophage or oppose it.

[maurice tali zorah]

ContinentTurtle wrote...

Okay, my idea for Mass Effect 4...

The game is set 500 years after the Reaper war. The Quarians have fully recovered and are a thriving species with 3 billion individuals. The humans, asari and turians are also on the path to full recovery, but it hasn't had the same speed as the quarians because Thessia, Palaven and Earth were the most affected planets. Their economy was practically destroyed. The Krogan turn out to be a thrustworthy species, and emply birth control to keep their numbers in check. They don't want to be seen as savages anymore. The Krogan now have 10 colonies, all thriving, and Tuchanka has become a better place. Krogan are building cities again, with flowing water and electricity. The Krogan trust the Salarians now thanks to Mordin's sacrifice, and allow a second Shroud to be built to help speed clearing Tuchanka of any remaining nuclear waste. Krogan and Salarians are partners now.

The Yahg have begun to travel space 300 years ago, and they discovererd the Citadel and everyone there. Despite the council making a huge fuzz about the Yahg, because they killed the council's contact team, the Yahg are friendly now, and are not aggressive at all. Reluctantly the council accepts them in galactic society. Now, 500 years after the Reaper war, and 300 years after the Yahg began spaceflight, Yahg are at every level of galactic society. Citizens, (feared) C-Sec officers, merc bands, shopkeepers...

And while everyone thinks themselves save, they are attacked! From... within.

The Yahg try to take over, and attack from every corner of galactic society. Turns out, Yahg are excellent actors. Of course you have to stop them, and put the Yahg in their place. But with a species stronger, sturdier, faster and smarter than Krogan, how can we win a battle from within?


Okay, this is just an idea, it's probably crap. Is it a good idea or should I flush it down the toilet?

If i could play as a Quarian i found it a perfect idea. (:

[DonJuan2000]

The end of ME3, i mean the real end RED ending but leaving open the question of developments ..... , Well in fact it is perfect to develop a new universe ... there are many things that you can do in a sequel. I hope it is a sequel, maybe thrown a few centuries in the future but the same influenced, at least on some key concepts but i hope as much as possible, by the choices made in the previous trilogy, it would be a crazy cool: D

And so we will "crash" into The Legend of Shepard!

Mechanical: I hope it is not too distorted, you can always improve but without changing the mix rpg-action and dialogue interactivity that form the backbone of this masterpiece. Would introduce something more RPG and a little more exploration, an exploratory feeling like star trek and larger environments, at least the major ones, and of course a great story. ME is based on the history and beautiful way to tell and live them, do not need to upset the title. Let's hope so. Love thermal clips, keep using

[DonJuan2000]

p.s. dont totally cancel the concept of Reapers.... they are great, they must be like Sith and Dark Side in Star Wars, always present in some way and with much things more to say and discover....

[shodiswe]

jack253 wrote...

What I would like to see is a game that takes place during the krogan rebellions. The way I see it work is:

• The player can choose between turian, asari and salarian each with it's own Origin story to give background to the player beyond a choice between three options.
  
• Sinds it takes place long before the humans step up to the plate, it won't be a human focussed game.
  
  
• The game can take place over the whole ten years of the rebellion showing how the situation becomes more and more desperate as the conflict goes on. (I know that this was done in DA2, and I'm not going to argue about this or the storytelling in DA2)
  
  
• the rise of the spectres
  
  
• the chance of meeting a younger wrex.
  
  
• the question of whether or not the player would unleash the genophage or oppose it.

Like the First spectre? that Salarian that was shown in the council archives? The clearly Renegade extreme salarian that would have been sent to jail,if he hadn't been made a spectre?  

[*]But, no, it could work, but I prefer a sequel, or a story that spans several different time epriods at once... Liek Pulpfiction in space but perhaps conecting events that were separated by several milenia. Just one of all those crazy ideas out there 

Modifié par shodiswe, 25 mars 2013 - 05:04 .

[zombitologist]

 So first contact war would be cool, it'd allow for another human main character, but I was wondering if it'd be too much of a stretch to play an Asari. Then you could experience every major moment of the ME pre-shepard and Reaper War time frame. From a young character to a matriarch you'd get to see rachni wars, krogan rebellions, maybe Morning War, and, peripherally, the first contact war. You'd also get to interact with various different characters and take a different perspective than the usual human centered gameplay. Sure it'd limit a bit of chracter customization but it'd allow for a greater use of personality customization.

[xmeduo]

Syuvial wrote...

xmeduo wrote...

Syuvial wrote...

xmeduo wrote...

Bioware... just get rid of thermal clips for the next game!!! Bring back overheating weapons(ME1 weapons)

Oh god, i hope not. Give me thermals any day. 

No, adding thermal clips only contributed to the Gearsification of Mass Effect.

 

It was a bad mechanic that felt clumsy, and left strong weapons too overpowered, while weaker ones became useless. The fact that other games use a similar system is irrlevant.

When they put thermal clips in ME2 that added reloading..... reloading WHY AM I STILL RELOADING. I liked ME1 becuase it actually felt futuristic that we reached a point where we didnt need to carry ammo and it was awesome!!! Dont you realise that Mass Effect 1 is the only reason that the ME universe could expand to what it is now...... Me3 is terrible compared to Me1 but still.

Ammo had nothing to do with it. Effective world building and good writing are what drove Mass Effect into popularity. That does not mean that everything about the game was good.

So its around 2183 we are in the 22nd century.... and you have guns that do not EVER run out of ammo..... then you decide to add Thermal Clips and only a limited number of these can be carried. What a great idea!!! It sounds ike a good idea to downgrade a weapon and take a step BACKWARDS. So when I have Krogan Warlord is charging me and I have no thermal clips.... instead of backing up and waiting for my gun to cool down I get wrecked.

You say it's a step backwards, but it's a lot more practical from my angle. Switching to disposable heat sinks means more shots per minute, since you don't need to wait for weapon cooldown. It also allows you to make stronger weapons, since the risk of damaging a heat sink isn't a problem, whereas with integrated heat sinks, if you damage it, you just lost your gun. the universal nature of thermal clips also means that any soldier with a good head on their shoulders isn't going to run out of ammo in any realistic situation. 

In ME1 my assault rifle and pistol would NEVER overheat it was super efficient. You had the ability to totally change the dynamics of a weapon. My ME1 my shotgun could be a quick firing beast in close quarters... or I could tighten the spread add damage and make it like a Claymore..... that fires slugs.

What's your point? In ME3 my Suppressor/Harrier/Locust loadout never ran out of ammo, was significantly more modable, and could drop brutes or even banshees in no time flat.

Funny thing is ME3 weapon mods look like cut and paste arts and craft's.

That's got nothing to do with thermal clips though. That's more about visual fidelity than anything else.

*Ignoring your sea of multiple quotes*

Weapon mechanics in ME1 WERE NOT Clumsy, you just suck at the game and can't control your firing. You are hypocritical because you just said ME1 weapons are OP and then you turn around and say that thermal clips make stronger weapons. I do say... ME1 weapons are NOT overpowered. 

You say you never run out of ammo. But your using a suppressor and Harrier LOL. Those two weapons Have the worst ammo capacity in the game. You are obviously running out of ammo with your harrier. If not you must be sitting back and doing nothing on your team. Your point about heat sinks is irrelevant. In mass effect the guns heat sinks never fail. They were designed to do just that. Anyway if any ME weapon is op it is your harrier NOT my Spectre Assault rifle
Fy















 Oh btw ME1>ME3. 
This was typed in my BB10 the predictive text keep messing everything up

Modifié par xmeduo, 25 mars 2013 - 11:48 .

[Scorpion1O1]

I don't see a Post-Shepard story happening. Since it will most likely be a prequel or during the MET, I would find it very appealing to play as all the characters at various moments. Garrus as Archangel then Liara as an information broker etc. Tarantino style have them come together and cross paths somehow.

Or you can just have a new character, story and setting all together.
I am personally very interested in the Geth or playing as an AI.

Ultimately my interest would be a new adventure that takes place after the Mass Effect Trilogy even further into the future. However, I have no idea how you would begin to write that considering the ending.

As far as gameplay goes I'll tell you I am not interested in a top-down RTS game. I say maybe stick with the current formula.

[Syuvial]

[quote]xmeduo wrote...

[quote]Syuvial wrote...

[quote]xmeduo wrote...

[quote]Syuvial wrote...

[quote]xmeduo wrote...

Bioware... just get rid of thermal clips for the next game!!! Bring back overheating weapons(ME1 weapons)[/quote]Oh god, i hope not. Give me thermals any day. 
[/quote]

No, adding thermal clips only contributed to the Gearsification of Mass Effect.[/quote] 

It was a bad mechanic that felt clumsy, and left strong weapons too overpowered, while weaker ones became useless. The fact that other games use a similar system is irrlevant.

[quote]When they put thermal clips in ME2 that added reloading..... reloading WHY AM I STILL RELOADING. I liked ME1 becuase it actually felt futuristic that we reached a point where we didnt need to carry ammo and it was awesome!!! Dont you realise that Mass Effect 1 is the only reason that the ME universe could expand to what it is now...... Me3 is terrible compared to Me1 but still. [/quote]
Ammo had nothing to do with it. Effective world building and good writing are what drove Mass Effect into popularity. That does not mean that everything about the game was good.

[quote]So its around 2183 we are in the 22nd century.... and you have guns that do not EVER run out of ammo..... then you decide to add Thermal Clips and only a limited number of these can be carried. What a great idea!!! It sounds ike a good idea to downgrade a weapon and take a step BACKWARDS. So when I have Krogan Warlord is charging me and I have no thermal clips.... instead of backing up and waiting for my gun to cool down I get wrecked.[/quote] You say it's a step backwards, but it's a lot more practical from my angle. Switching to disposable heat sinks means more shots per minute, since you don't need to wait for weapon cooldown. It also allows you to make stronger weapons, since the risk of damaging a heat sink isn't a problem, whereas with integrated heat sinks, if you damage it, you just lost your gun. the universal nature of thermal clips also means that any soldier with a good head on their shoulders isn't going to run out of ammo in any realistic situation. 

[quote]In ME1 my assault rifle and pistol would NEVER overheat it was super efficient. You had the ability to totally change the dynamics of a weapon. My ME1 my shotgun could be a quick firing beast in close quarters... or I could tighten the spread add damage and make it like a Claymore..... that fires slugs.[/quote] What's your point? In ME3 my Suppressor/Harrier/Locust loadout never ran out of ammo, was significantly more modable, and could drop brutes or even banshees in no time flat.

[quote]Funny thing is ME3 weapon mods look like cut and paste arts and craft's.
[/quote]That's got nothing to do with thermal clips though. That's more about visual fidelity than anything else.
[/quote]

[quote]*Ignoring your sea of multiple quotes* [/quote]
sorry for being organized.

[quote]Weapon mechanics in ME1 WERE NOT. Clumsy you just sick at the game and can't control your firing.[/quote]
They were absolutely clumsy. Most of the gameplay was clumsy. My firing is fine in literally every other game. ME1 guns were just terrible. 

[quote]You are hypocritical because you just said ME1 weapons are OP and then you turn around and say that thermal clips all own stronger weapons. I do say... ME1 weapons are NOT overpowered. [/quote] No, i said that it made strong weapons too OP while leaving the weaker weapons useless. Every gun in ME3 was usable at the end of the game, even your starter pistol could be used to good effect right up to the last mission. 

[quote]You say you never run out of ammo. But your using a suppress or band Harrier LOL. Those two weapons Have the worst ammo capacity in the game. You are obviously running out of ammo with your harrier. If not you must be sitting back and doing nothing on your team. [/quote]
Not once did i run out of ammo on both weapons at the same time. Through the ENTIRE GAME. it isn't hard, particularly when ammo is as prevalent as it is. 

[quote]Your point about heat sinks is irrelevant. In mass effect the guns heat sinks never fail. They were designed to do just that. Anyway if any ME weapon is op it is your harrier NOT my Spectre Assault rifle[/quote]
The heat sink point was meant to address plausible lore-reasons to move to disposable clips. 

Also, Harrier isn't the OP weapon there, the suppressor is.  In fact, the harrier was only my choice weapon because i like the way it sounds. If i were really going for highest effect, i'dve used a striker, to cover long range situations. 


[quote] Oh btw ME1>ME3.[/quote]
Only in terms of story. Art design was lazier, level design was average at best, world environments were terrible, combat was syrupy and aggravating at worst, and only got better once your equipment made you practically invincible. 

[Syuvial]

Scorpion1O1 wrote...

I don't see a Post-Shepard story happening. Since it will most likely be a prequel or during the MET, I would find it very appealing to play as all the characters at various moments. Garrus as Archangel then Liara as an information broker etc. Tarantino style have them come together and cross paths somehow.

Or you can just have a new character, story and setting all together.
I am personally very interested in the Geth or playing as an AI.

Ultimately my interest would be a new adventure that takes place after the Mass Effect Trilogy even further into the future. However, I have no idea how you would begin to write that considering the ending.

As far as gameplay goes I'll tell you I am not interested in a top-down RTS game. I say maybe stick with the current formula.

A post sheppard story wouldn't be as difficult as it's made out to be.
Red ending: Sheppard kills reapers. no reapers. lose the chance at any geth interactions. 

Blue ending: Sheppard controls reapers. Decides, in her now infinite wisdom, that the galaxy isn't ready for that level of technology yet. Reapers leave. No reapers.

Green Ending: Everyone is robot! just apply that nifty little filter over the regular meshes of all the characters. Reapers see that galaxy still isn't ready for that level of technology. Reapers leave. No reapers.  

I mean, i'm not saying that's the optimum response, but it's not terribly difficult to envision. 

[Obadiah]

Randomize the faces, appearance, and perhaps attitudes, of key characters to make repeat play-throughs more interesting and unique.

More branching mini-plots.

[Bill Casey]

Put this on the AVOID AT ALL COST list for future projects

- Brainwashing the enemy or keeping them as slaves as the Paragon option

It's not Paragon. It's completely deplorable, heinous, repulsive and disgusting...
It feels like something I shouldn't even have to say, but you've done it twice now, and I want to make certain you recognize this issue, considering there was almost nothing about the actual ethics of controlling the reapers in ME3. The argument was almost entirely about the methods TIM used to achieve it and how unfeasible is was...

Shepard's dialogue in the extended cut seemed like you didn't get this at all...
Sorry, but I just want to make sure...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 26 mars 2013 - 01:59 .

[NoTrucksJusticar]

jack253 wrote...

What I would like to see is a game that takes place during the krogan rebellions. The way I see it work is:

• The player can choose between turian, asari and salarian each with it's own Origin story to give background to the player beyond a choice between three options.
• Sinds it takes place long before the humans step up to the plate, it won't be a human focussed game.
• The game can take place over the whole ten years of the rebellion showing how the situation becomes more and more desperate as the conflict goes on. (I know that this was done in DA2, and I'm not going to argue about this or the storytelling in DA2)
• the rise of the spectres
• the chance of meeting a younger wrex.
• the question of whether or not the player would unleash the genophage or oppose it.

This is actually pretty close to my own idea -- uncannily so, in fact
I would further say that:

• The focus on non-human cultures would create unparalleled ability to explore the asari, salarian, and turian civilizations at the moment-to-moment level; for example, exploring the Justicar order in more depth, or investigating the cold treatment of turian biotics by the Hierarchy. Imagine the additions to the Codex!
• Don't forget the possibility of also choosing a krogan "antagonist"! That's a really cool possibility, imo, and one which would only further add to the moral dilemma of the Krogan Rebellions (with particular regard to the Genophage).
• Such a game would allow for an intense focus on diplomacy and politics, whilst also allowing for plenty of combat -- thereby allowing for the fusion of moral quandary-laden dialogue and exciting combat we all know and love.
• The Council's reaction to the Krogan Rebellions allows for the same "galaxy uniting against a common menace" dynamic that the original dynamic had, combined with a great sense of moral ambiguity due to our already knowing the ramifications of the Genophage beforehand.
• You forgot one other thing -- the turians' rise to Council species status!

I would like to commend you for mentioning the rise of the Spectres, and the chance to meet a younger Wrex -- I hadn't thought of those possibilities! :happy:
All in all, I advocate the Krogan Rebellions as a way for BioWare to achieve what they want to with the new ME: just enough familiarity, whilst looking at things in a new and exotic way. I'm glad I'm not the only one!

[xmeduo]

They were absolutely clumsy. Most of the gameplay was clumsy. My firing
is fine in literally every other game. ME1 guns were just terrible.

You seriosly must be the worst at third person shooters. You also must be so terrible at Mass Effect that you NEVER got an X Level weapon.... particulaly the Spectre Weapons which outpeform any ME2 or ME3 gun.

Do you even own ME1 or ME2? or did you rent it.

No, i said that it made strong weapons too OP while leaving the weaker
weapons useless. Every gun in ME3 was usable at the end of the game,
even your starter pistol could be used to good effect right up to the
last mission.

Lol you are joking right, in ME3 unless you are a vanguard, Sentinel or Adept you are NOT running around with a Predator on Insanity... did you even play insanity? or did you do casual.


For Insanity in Mass Effect 3 there are plenty of useless weaoons lets start with the obvious.... Shuriken, Katana, Scimitar, Phaeston, Revenant, Raptor, Arc Pistol, plenty more.

 

The heat sink point was meant to address plausible lore-reasons to move to disposable clips. 

Also,
Harrier isn't the OP weapon there, the suppressor is.  In fact, the
harrier was only my choice weapon because i like the way it sounds. If i
were really going for highest effect, i'dve used a striker, to cover
long range situations.

You keep criticizing Mass Effect 1 guns but they will ALWAYS be superior to anything else.

Oh by the way,  in the most recent DLC they
added the M7 Lancer Assault rifle. Based on a the M7 from ME1 it is
pratically the best all around AssaultRifle in the game.

It is powerful, DOESNT NEED those stupid thermal clips, Accurate, Light and Perfect for casters. It is everything that a Mass Effect gun should be.

Only in terms of story. Art design was lazier, level design was average
at best, world environments were terrible, combat was syrupy and
aggravating at worst, and only got better once your equipment made you
practically invincible.

I disagree, Mass Effect 1 was far more creative and how dare you call the art design lazy. The design of Mass Effect is what spawned the design in ME2 and ME3. You cant bite the hand that feeded you. You were probably to lazy to explore the uncharted planets also. Mass Effect 1 was far more vast and had a better sense of adventure.

And not to mention you are comparing a game(ME1) that was in development as early as 05 compared to a game(ME3) which was developed as early 2010. This is not a fair comparison in terms of graphics.

You do realize that technology and developers tools got much better from 2005 to 2011(around the time when ME3 was "finished" I say "finished" becuase I saw the piece of crap Beta that was leaked.

Just look at Mass Effect 1 it has far more depth compared to any game that came out in 2007. ME1 is still superior to ME3 no matter what you say.

With ME3 EA and Bioware set the bar far too low... Once again Mass Effect 3 is a prime example of EA's Gearsification of the Mass Effect series, thermal clips also contributed to it.


The enviorments were better in ME1, Citadel was bigger and had more areas, Elevators were 10X better than loading screens... lol do you actually like to stare at a loading sreen?

Mass Effect 3 was pathetic game and it doesnt deserve the Mass Effect name. Througout the Campaign you literally only fight 3 enemies...... Cerbures, Reapers and Geth to me that is boring as hell.

Now take  ME1's enemies.... you had:  Mercenaries, Citadel Thugs, Turian Assasins, Asari Commandos, Biotic Terrorists, Geth, Husks, Varren, Rachni, Krogan Warlords, Krogan Battlemasters, Salarian Assasins, Human Assasins, Thresher Maws(on uncharted planets), Saren, and Sovereign.....

Would you look at that... troughout ME3 you literally only fight 3 groups... they really tried hard to make combat feel fresh right? Does ME3 feel special to you? to me it feels like a clunky piece of crap that tried to hard to incorporate action.

• ME1 experience= Non Linear (no specific order to do missions)
• ME3 experience  = Linear (you are forced to do certain missions)
• ME1 experience = Adventure
• ME3 experience = No Adventure
• ME1 story = Manual Choices
• ME3 story= Auto Choices
• ME1 combat = Guns were better
• ME3 combat = Guns suck
• ME1 = More Diversity
• ME3 = Same enemies over and over again
• ME1 = Perfect Story and ending
• ME3 = Story was trash and ending was trash
• ME1 side missions = Uncharted Planets and facilities and more side missions
• ME3 side missions = Recycle the SMALL maps from multiplayer
• ME1 = Older game and still better and more original.
• ME3 = Crappy version of Gears of war with commander shepard.

Mass Effect was the better game and I hope that Bioware gets the big picture of what to do with the next game. First step is leaving EA if possible and go back to the roots. If its not broken DONT FIX IT! and Mass Effect 1 WAS NOT broken.

Modifié par xmeduo, 26 mars 2013 - 03:57 .

[Syuvial]

[quote]They were absolutely clumsy. Most of the gameplay was clumsy. My firing
is fine in literally every other game. ME1 guns were just terrible.[/quote]

[quote]xmeduo wrote...
You seriosly must be the worst at third person shooters. You also must be so terrible at Mass Effect that you NEVER got an X Level weapon.... particulaly the Spectre Weapons which outpeform any ME2 or ME3 gun.

Do you even own ME1 or ME2? or did you rent it.[/quote]
I own all three games, and got 2 and 3 both on release day. Still collecting the DLC for 3. And no, I'm relatively good at third person shooters MASS EFFECT  JUST HAD REALLY BAD GAMEPLAY. Take off your nostalgia goggles. A game can have things wrong with it and still be good. 

[quote]No, i said that it made strong weapons too OP while leaving the weaker
weapons useless. Every gun in ME3 was usable at the end of the game,
even your starter pistol could be used to good effect right up to the
last mission. [/quote]

[quote]Lol you are joking right, in ME3 unless you are a vanguard, Sentinel or Adept you are NOT running around with a Predator on Insanity... did you even play insanity? or did you do casual.[/quote]
I haven't bothered with insanity, but i just did about three quarters of Priority: Earth using a Predator X, Mantis X, and Avenger X as a soldier with AP ammo special ability. Things got hairy a bit, but not terribly hard.

[quote]For Insanity in Mass Effect 3 there are plenty of useless weaoons lets start with the obvious.... Shuriken, Katana, Scimitar, Phaeston, Revenant, Raptor, Arc Pistol, plenty more.[/quote]
What, do you just have only one play style? Phaeston, Revenant, Arc Pistol, and Shuriken are all totally usable.
 

[quote]The heat sink point was meant to address plausible lore-reasons to move to disposable clips. 

Also,
Harrier isn't the OP weapon there, the suppressor is.  In fact, the
harrier was only my choice weapon because i like the way it sounds. If i
were really going for highest effect, i'dve used a striker, to cover
long range situations. [/quote]

[quote]You keep criticizing Mass Effect 1 guns but they will ALWAYS be superior to anything else.

Oh by the way,  in the most recent DLC they
added the M7 Lancer Assault rifle. Based on a the M7 from ME1 it is
pratically the best all around AssaultRifle in the game.

It is powerful, DOESNT NEED those stupid thermal clips, Accurate, Light and Perfect for casters. It is everything that a Mass Effect gun should be. [/quote]
poppycock. It's a great gun right up until the first time it overheats. At that point it becomes the WORST. I thought it would be a great gun, for the infinite ammo, but it was TERRIBLE. 

[quote]Only in terms of story. Art design was lazier, level design was average
at best, world environments were terrible, combat was syrupy and
aggravating at worst, and only got better once your equipment made you
practically invincible. [/quote]

[quote]I disagree, Mass Effect 1 was far more creative and how dare you call the art design lazy. The design of Mass Effect is what spawned the design in ME2 and ME3. You cant bite the hand that feeded you. You were probably to lazy to explore the uncharted planets also. Mass Effect 1 was far more vast and had a better sense of adventure.[/quote] My first playthrough i went through every bland lifeless planet you could possibly land on. Being the forerunner to the design of the other games does not make it BETTER, just OLDER. 

The art design was incredibly lazy. Every wall, every building, and person looked exactly the damn same. 


[quote]And not to mention you are comparing a game(ME1) that was in development as early as 05 compared to a game(ME3) which was developed as early 2010. This is not a fair comparison in terms of graphics.

You do realize that technology and developers tools got much better from 2005 to 2011(around the time when ME3 was "finished" I say "finished" becuase I saw the piece of crap Beta that was leaked.

Just look at Mass Effect 1 it has far more depth compared to any game that came out in 2007.[/quote]
I'm not talking about resolution or polygon counts. I'm talking about the armor that looked like pajamas.



[quote]ME1 is still superior to ME3 no matter what you say.[/quote]
you don't get it. I'm not saying one is better than the other. I'm saying that each succeeded where the other failed. 

[quote]With ME3 EA and Bioware set the bar far too low... Once again Mass Effect 3 is a prime example of EA's Gearsification of the Mass Effect series, thermal clips also contributed to it.[/quote]
You really hate gears of war. I don't need to play it to know that the ME3 ammo mechanic WORKS. It's fun, regardless of what other games used it.


[quote]The enviorments were better in ME1, Citadel was bigger and had more areas, Elevators were 10X better than loading screens... lol do you actually like to stare at a loading sreen?[/quote] Here's the thing, yes, the citadel was bigger. It was also tedious and full of useless corridors and empty space.

I'm amazed that you expect anyone to take you seriously when you praise the elevators. the elevators were just like real elevators. Boring wasts of time. Maybe you should get a decent computer, because my loading screens have never been even a quarter as long as one of those godforsaken elevator rides.

Bioware removed these things because they were trimming the fat. Less jogging back and forth, more playing games.


[quote]Mass Effect 3 was pathetic game and it doesnt deserve the Mass Effect name. Througout the Campaign you literally only fight 3 enemies...... Cerbures, Reapers and Geth to me that is boring as hell.

Now take  ME1's enemies.... you had:  Mercenaries, Citadel Thugs, Turian Assasins, Asari Commandos, Biotic Terrorists, Geth, Husks, Varren, Rachni, Krogan Warlords, Krogan Battlemasters, Salarian Assasins, Human Assasins, Thresher Maws(on uncharted planets), Saren, and Sovereign.....

Would you look at that... troughout ME3 you literally only fight 3 groups... they really tried hard to make combat feel fresh right? Does ME3 feel special to you? to me it feels like a clunky piece of crap that tried to hard to incorporate action. [/quote]ME3 clunky? What are you even talking about. The spacebar use was hard to adapt to at first, but ME3 was slick and fast paced. 

The difference is that the factions in ME3 were fleshed out, and required different solutions to each problem. 


"Mercenaries, Citadel Thugs, Biotic Terrorists, Geth, Turian Assasins, Krogan Warlords, Krogan Battlemasters, Asari Commandos, Human Assasins, Salarian Assasins." All of these displayed  the exact same very limited behaviour. The only things affecting difficulty in involvements with them were their numbers, and what color pajamas they were wearing.

"Husks," same as the others, excet it doesn't hide when you start shooting it.

"Varren, Rachni," Sure, they're different, but they aren't a real threat, ever. Feels more like pest control than combat.

"Thresher Maws(on uncharted planets)", nothing involving the mako will ever be considered a positive. 


"Saren, and Sovereign" the fifth and final behaviour group. The "boss fight". Woo. 

Gameplay in ME1 : "hug a corner and shoot at people until they fall down" is the universal solution to every situation aside from Geth Armatures. On rare occasions, the cornere isn't even necessary. 



Gameplay in ME3: "sit in cover and use one skill/ammo type to break shields and barrriers", "Take down the fodder", "Target the snipers/rocket soldiers", "Snipe the shield bearers", "prioritize brutes/banshees" etc. etc. 

• ME1 experience= Non Linear (no specific order to do missions)
• ME3 experience  = Linear (you are forced to do certain missions)
• ME1 experience = Adventure
• ME3 experience = No Adventure
• ME1 story = Manual Choices
• ME3 story= Auto Choices
• ME1 combat = Guns were better
• ME3 combat = Guns suck
• ME1 = More Diversity
• ME3 = Same enemies over and over again
• ME1 = Perfect Story and ending
• ME3 = Story was trash and ending was trash
• ME1 side missions = Uncharted Planets and facilities and more side missions
• ME3 side missions = Recycle the SMALL maps from multiplayer
• ME1 = Older game and still better and more original.
• ME3 = Crappy version of Gears of war with commander shepard.

Mass Effect was the better game and I hope that Bioware gets the big picture of what to do with the next game. First step is leaving EA if possible and go back to the roots. If its not broken DONT FIX IT! and Mass Effect 1 WAS NOT broken.

[/quote]

[list][*]ME1 experience = Only primary missions are worth doing
[*]ME3 experience = all missions contain entertainment value
[*]ME1 experience = Adventure[*]ME3 experience = Adventure, as long as you aren't some creeptastic VG hipster.[*]ME1 story = Manual Choices[*]ME3 story= You have to set the game to auto-choose for you, numb nuts. [*]ME1 combat = Guns were AWFUL. 
[*]ME3 combat = Guns WORKED LIKE GUNS[*]ME1 = Same enemies over and over, just pallette swapped, and occasionally with slower moving projectiles.
[*]ME3 = Same enemies over and over again. Except for the part where they had different behaviours, appearances, and capabilities.
[*]ME1 = good story and ending
[*]ME3 = Story was passable, right up until the last half hour.
[*]ME1 side missions = Uncharted Planets and facilities and more side missions, all of which were identicle, and useless.
[*]ME3 side missions = Goals, accomplishments, and unique equipment
[*]ME1 = Great story, poor gameplay
[*]ME3 =  Poor story, great gameplay


The only things in ME 3 that need fixing are the plot, and some of the spacebar functions should be split to other keys. And the association with EA. Not for content reasons, but for the "Connecting to EA servers" wait time problem. 

Modifié par Syuvial, 26 mars 2013 - 05:13 .

[Guanxii]

What I would like more than anything is to have more robust class power customization options so that each class becomes more personalized and less rigid in structure.

After all these unique classes/powers/configurations in the multiplayer experience the standard classes are really kind of boring and stale now after years of the same formula. I find myself constantly using external mods so that I can subvert the bonus power system and build a fun character with a unique power config that interests me. 

Building unique classes should be a core feature of ME4, not something you have to find an external workaround for. At the very minimum remove the limit on bonus powers so that we can choose which powers we want to invest in. Let's spice things up in ME4 with everything we've collectively learned from ME3 multiplayer.

Modifié par Guanxii, 26 mars 2013 - 12:48 .

[Dreadcall]

Syuvial wrote...
 the ME3 ammo mechanic WORKS. 

It doesn't. Not with ammo crates being placed every other corner and clips dropping form enemies es well. You will pretty much never be in a situation where you are screwed because you did not manage your ammo. At worst you will have to run a few seconds to a crate. The whole system serves no function. 

As for what to do with it for the next game, they should just keep both, similar to how the lancer and avanger are both available in citadel. The thermal clip versions probably need some extra damage per shot on top of more shots/minute if they come to their senses and make it so ammo isn't lying around absolutely everywhere. 

As for what i want in the next game: ship customization (a lot of it) and well written mates to hang out with on MY ship, the citadel and various other places. 

[Braderli]

definitely sequel not prequel! maybe a hundred years or so  from the reaper war in me3. also it would be nice to play as different races, maybe even new races (offspring of current races after mating with another race) to make a mixed one. i think the reapers could possibily be the enemy still, i mean what's to say something is still going on in 'dark space' maybe not the reapers but something related

Modifié par Braderli, 26 mars 2013 - 02:09 .

[inusannonn]

its probably to late to even add to this thread since it was like 6months old or something.

but anyway since its here.... it doesnt matter to me if its a sequel or prequel. I just hope the story or stories will be absolute awesomeness.

I really liked the Leviathan DLC the dive into the ocean and the conversation with the organic reaper creature. Maybe it was just the ocean itself that made me want to know more or explore more. Also would like to know more about darkspace & life energy.

an MMO? i donno about that eh... I donno starwars game mmo didnt go so well imo. Maybe a Citadel one might? prob would be just a run n gun quest kinda thing and might get boring real quick. Prob be the elite guild/clans only wanting to get better gear to pwn on a pvp field or be the number 1 guild on some kind of allstar champ leaderboard kinda thing.

that prob would work for those kinds of folks who live to see their user/player names in the spotlights.

whatever bioware does I hope they go with awesome quality story first before anything else. I still believe that bioware is the absolute best video game story writers/tellers. Only other folks that can match that kind of creativity is bethesda imo.

the original team that created everquest 1 stories/history was awesome but I think they are now trion or something. Speaking of trion ~ i dont want to side track but i will be playing their defiance mmo on my xbox come next week. I hope its awesome as some of those beta ppl have been saying it is. I bought the ultimate edition from gamestop.

anyway back to topic about MassEffect4 ideas ~ I just want one incredible awesome amazing story to explore, adventure in with new characters to meet, cultures to discover and the game universe still rooted tied to what happend from ME3's ending.

no idea how that can happen but I think it should have strong ties roots from the r/b/g choice. Space/ghostkid was wrong imo but maybe he was right about a few things ~ I donno that speculation is just to exausting now its all over the internets everywhere LOL. Tell ya what tho its definately fun to read all the ideas ppl have about it.

maybe an MMO where players help to restore/build the mass relays. players can choose where to have a home anywhere in the universe. Settle anywhere they want, live anywhere they want.Can be any race they want to be, choose their own path, career, or even a lone wolf hunter.

But I think to get anywhere to connect to other star systems to adventure/explore ~ those relays have to be restored. The only way that can happen is to work together. Many servers with unique names from original Mass Effect.

but the stories.... honestly those stories cant be forgotten and hopefully cut scenes are never left out. Story first imo then let the players create their path/future in the game.

im not against micro transactions but can you have like a one year sub or something but the benifits that come with that sub better be good! dont cheat us out on forking over a chunk money only to get i donno a tiny volus statue in a grass skirt for the dashboard of our space shuttles.

edit: wanted to add something to my wall of text LOL

if it will be an mmo?  I would like to be a Drell and live like Thane(- illness), if marriage possible in a masseffectmmo? i will definately find my own blue asari and prob if possible settle down on whats left of Thessia.

Modifié par inusannonn, 26 mars 2013 - 04:52 .

[xmeduo]

[quote]I own all three games, and got 2 and 3 both on release day. Still collecting the DLC for 3. And no, I'm relatively good at third person shooters MASS EFFECT  JUST HAD REALLY BAD GAMEPLAY. Take off your nostalgia goggles. A game can have things wrong with it and still be good.[/quote]

Prove it why dont you have ME2 registered. Anyway you are just bolstering the fact that you are terrible at third person shooters if you experienced bad gameplay. Mass Effect 3 has top much wrong with it to be considered good, it wasnt even a positive step from ME1.


[quote]I haven't bothered with insanity, but i just did about three quarters of Priority: Earth using a Predator X, Mantis X, and Avenger X as a soldier with AP ammo special ability. Things got hairy a bit, but not terribly hard.[/quote]

LOL you didnt play insanity haha!! Answer my question? did you play casual? If you had trouble on that I would advise you to re evaulate your skills in third person shooters. You have no right to call ME1 weapons bad when you were the one playing casual.


[quote] What, do you just have only one play style? Phaeston, Revenant, Arc Pistol, and Shuriken are all totally usable. [/quote]

I can play with any and all classes on Mass Effect. My main is the Soldier and if im using a Revenant or an Arc Pistol im not doing efficient damage. There is also no point to a Phaeston it shoots BB's.

I would rather use my Saber (the only vanilla gun in ME3 I respect) , Paladin, and Wraith.
 
[quote] poppycock. It's a great gun right up until the first time it overheats. At that point it becomes the WORST. I thought it would be a great gun, for the infinite ammo, but it was TERRIBLE. [/quote]

You're the only bulls**t*r here. If you overheat the gun you dont know how to control your firing. If you are using a Lancer:
1. You shoot,
2. USE POWERS (while gun cools)
3. Repeat

That way you are actually more efficient with taking down enemies.

[quote]My first playthrough i went through every bland lifeless planet you could possibly land on. Being the forerunner to the design of the other games does not make it BETTER, just OLDER. [/quote]



You actually excpect an uncharted planet to have vibrant citys like earth? Get a grip on reality bro.. Mars looks bland and lifeless  but there are many things yet to be discovered. It is the preccusor to both sequels and you cannot change the fact that it influenced everything.


[quote] The art design was incredibly lazy. Every wall, every building, and person looked exactly the damn same. [/quote]

I could say the same about Mass Effect 3
I disagree with you, each character looked different if you actually payed attention. You are exagerating everything: Illos, Noveria, and the Citadel all looked different.

[quote] I'm not talking about resolution or polygon counts. I'm talking about the armor that looked like pajamas. [/quote]

You mean this?



OR THIS





YEAH that is defnietly something that you would sleep in *sarcasm*.  These are the most bad ass looking armors ever. Even Tela Vasir from ME2 uses the Spectre armor.

[quote] you don't get it. I'm not saying one is better than the other. I'm saying that each succeeded where the other failed. [/quote]

Lies

[quote] You really hate gears of war. I don't need to play it to know that the ME3 ammo mechanic WORKS. It's fun, regardless of what other games used it. [/quote]

False, I dont hate gears of war. I HATE THE FACT that Mass Effect 3 tried to be like gears of war.

When Mass Effect 1 came out you couldnt compare it with GOW 1 they both were different. Both published by Microsoft Game Studios but they were different.

Non Linear TPSRPG vs a Linear TPS.

 Then ME3 comes along takes away lots of choices and basically makes everything linear by making me take certain missions when I didnt want to. This crossed the line that seperated GOW and ME.

[quote] Here's the thing, yes, the citadel was bigger. It was also tedious and full of useless corridors and empty space. [/quote]

You were obviosly to lazy to play the side missions on the citadel. You would find out that every alley, room and space was used at some point.

[quote] I'm amazed that you expect anyone to take you seriously when you praise the elevators. the elevators were just like real elevators. Boring wasts of time. Maybe you should get a decent computer, because my loading screens have never been even a quarter as long as one of those godforsaken elevator rides.[/quote]

Elevators are still better than a loading screen. Oh by the way I dont play Mass Effect on PC.

But my 11.6 inch laptop is still powerful enough to run Battlefield 3 on Ultra... High is better for it though.

CPU: I5 3210 , 8 GB RAM , GPU: GT 650M

I am way over the requirments of ME3.... I would literally kill it.

[quote] Bioware removed these things because they were trimming the fat. Less jogging back and forth, more playing games. [/quote]

I literally found myself falling asleep while playing Mass Effect 3. There was actually more jogging back and forth doing those stupid FED EX delivery missions on the citadel. ME1 had something called rapid transit.... you ever heard of it?

[quote] ME3 clunky? What are you even talking about. The spacebar use was hard to adapt to at first, but ME3 was slick and fast paced. [/quote]

ME3 is far from slick, movements are not fluid and shooting doesnt feel natural or realistic often times I see my bullets literally passing through enemies and doing no damage. ME3 shouldnt have tried so hard at action becuase it failed.

[quote] The difference is that the factions in ME3 were fleshed out, and required different solutions to each problem. [/quote]

Wrong... lets see this is how you kill Cerburus, Repeas and Geth. You can shoot them, Biotic Explosion, Tech powers that is it.

Basically you just shoot and use powers and this works against all factions.

There is no special method to deal with any of them.... everything works. Why? Becuase Cerburus, Repears and Geth are the most boring and simplistic unit's in Mass Effect history. 





[quote] All of these displayed  the exact same very limited behaviour. The only things affecting difficulty in involvements with them were their numbers, and what color pajamas they were wearing. [/quote]

So you are saying a biotic Asari Commando or biotic terrorist is the same as a human thug with a pistol.... you are blind or you are oblivious to what biotics actually are. Have you even fought a Krogan Warlord or Battlemaster before? They dont just hide behind crates.

You would get destroyed on Insanity if you got hit by a sniper rifle on early levels..... seriosly one shot and your gone!!!! That doesnt happen in ME3.



[quote] "Husks," same as the others, excet it doesn't hide when you start shooting it.

"Varren, Rachni," Sure, they're different, but they aren't a real threat, ever. Feels more like pest control than combat.

"Thresher Maws(on uncharted planets)", nothing involving the mako will ever be considered a positive. [/quote]

Husks are the same on ME3.

Rachni are a threat above casual. Since you never played insanity of course Rachni dont seem like a theat to you. How about you ask the Salarians why they needed help of the Krogan.

Nothing involving your driving skills will ever be considred positive. Seriosly learn to drive the Mako and NO you cant climb 90 degree cliffs with it. 

[quote] Gameplay in ME1 : "hug a corner and shoot at people until they fall down" is the universal solution to every situation aside from Geth Armatures. On rare occasions, the cornere isn't even necessary. [/quote]

No in higher diffuclties you have to use strategy. Often times you have to command your squad to watch left and right and prevent enemy flanks. There are more types of units to deal with in ME1. There were snipers in ME1, there were rocket troopers in ME1... and
there were shields, barriers and health in ME1. There were heavy geth
units Geth Prime and Geth Juggernaught. Then you had Krogan and they dont hide.


[quote] Gameplay in ME3: "sit in cover and use one skill/ammo type to break shields and barrriers", "Take down the fodder", "Target the snipers/rocket soldiers", "Snipe the shield bearers", "prioritize brutes/banshees" etc. etc. [/quote]

So essentually gameplay in ME3 is also sit in a corner and shoot at things until they die. Yeah that sounds special.

[quote]
[*]ME1 experience = Only primary missions are worth doing
[*]ME3 experience = all missions contain entertainment value
[*]ME1 experience = Adventure[*]ME3 experience = Adventure, as long as you aren't some creeptastic VG hipster.[*]ME1 story = Manual Choices[*]ME3 story= You have to set the game to auto-choose for you, numb nuts. [*]ME1 combat = Guns were AWFUL. 
[*]ME3 combat = Guns WORKED LIKE GUNS[*]ME1 = Same enemies over and over, just pallette swapped, and occasionally with slower moving projectiles.
[*]ME3 = Same enemies over and over again. Except for the part where they had different behaviours, appearances, and capabilities.
[*]ME1 = good story and ending
[*]ME3 = Story was passable, right up until the last half hour.
[*]ME1 side missions = Uncharted Planets and facilities and more side missions, all of which were identicle, and useless.
[*]ME3 side missions = Goals, accomplishments, and unique equipment
[*]ME1 = Great story, poor gameplay
[*]ME3 =  Poor story, great gameplay
[*]
[*]

[*]
[*]

The only things in ME 3 that need fixing are the plot, and some of the spacebar functions should be split to other keys. And the association with EA. Not for content reasons, but for the "Connecting to EA servers" wait time problem . [/quote]

• ME3 needs more fixing than that. Guns did not work like guns... especially when you can see the projectile go through an enemy. and do no damage.
• ME1 had more enemies than ME3 did hands down and no it was not just texture swaps.
• In ME3 there are many times when the game DOES NOT allow you to make a choice regardless of auto choices or not. I did not have auto choices on, but there was a lack of choices compared to ME1.
• Guns were great in ME1.. if you know how to shoot. ME3=Horrible story from begining to end.
• Yes even the very beggining of ME3 was horrible, awkward and had no energy. Not to mention those voice actors were HORRIBLE during Shepards court thing.
• ME1 planets were different.... terain was different, colors were different even the sky was different. You just were to lazy to explore and pay attention.
• ME3 side missions=Fed Ex delivery. and what goals and rewards.... a number that increases War Assets.

War Assets ended up being basically USELESS in the ending of the game..you still get a crappy ending either way.

[Syuvial]

[quote]xmeduo wrote...

[quote]I own all three games, and got 2 and 3 both on release day. Still collecting the DLC for 3. And no, I'm relatively good at third person shooters MASS EFFECT JUST HAD REALLY BAD GAMEPLAY. Take off your nostalgia goggles. A game can have things wrong with it and still be good.[/quote]

[quote]Prove it why dont you have ME2 registered. Anyway you are just bolstering the fact that you are terrible at third person shooters if you experienced bad gameplay. Mass Effect 3 has top much wrong with it to be considered good, it wasnt even a positive step from ME1.[/quote]

Happy now? I didn't bother registering 2 because i had no interest in interacting with anything involving 2. 


You seem to think that because I'm saying ME1 had badgameplay means i thought it was hard. That isn't the case. 
It was BAD not DIFFICULT. Those are different things, see? 




[quote]I haven't bothered with insanity, but i just did about three quarters of Priority: Earth using a Predator X, Mantis X, and Avenger X as a soldier with AP ammo special ability. Things got hairy a bit, but not terribly hard.[/quote]

[quote]LOL you didnt play insanity haha!! Answer my question? did you play casual? If you had trouble on that I would advise you to re evaulate your skills in third person shooters. You have no right to call ME1 weapons bad when you were the one playing casual. [/quote]

And no, i never played casual. Always Hard mode. But if i did go through Mass Effect 1 again, I WOULD play casual, just to minimize the amount of time i had to spend in the awful combat. ME1 Was an amazing story, but that's really just about it.

[quote] What, do you just have only one play style? Phaeston, Revenant, Arc Pistol, and Shuriken are all totally usable. [/quote]

[quote]I can play with any and all classes on Mass Effect. My main is the Soldier and if im using a Revenant or an Arc Pistol im not doing efficient damage. There is also no point to a Phaeston it shoots BB's.

I would rather use my Saber (the only vanilla gun in ME3 I respect) , Paladin, and Wraith.[/quote]
That's nice, but your preferences don't invalidate other choices. The arc pistol hold and release function is great for dealing with entrenched positions. Charge it up, and deal all your damage at once instead of hanging out outside of cover getting shot.

The phaeston may shoot BBs, but it shoots a TON of them, quickly, accurately, and has good ammo capacity. 

 
[quote] poppycock. It's a great gun right up until the first time it overheats. At that point it becomes the WORST. I thought it would be a great gun, for the infinite ammo, but it was TERRIBLE. [/quote]

[/quote]You're the only bulls**t*r here. If you overheat the gun you dont know how to control your firing. If you are using a Lancer:
1. You shoot,
2. USE POWERS (while gun cools)
3. Repeat

That way you are actually more efficient with taking down enemies.[quote]
So soldiers just can't use it. A good gun shouldn't require you to be biotic. 
[quote]My first playthrough i went through every bland lifeless planet you could possibly land on. Being the forerunner to the design of the other games does not make it BETTER, just OLDER. [/quote]



[quote]You actually excpect an uncharted planet to have vibrant citys like earth? Get a grip on reality bro.. Mars looks bland and lifeless  but there are many things yet to be discovered. It is the preccusor to both sequels and you cannot change the fact that it influenced everything. [/quote]
Again, earlier =/= better. The problem isn't that the dead planets weren't vibrant. It's that the life supporting planets looked just like the dead ones, and there weren't ANY cities or anything of the like. no colonies, nothing. Just a bunch of hills and mountains, no matter where you were, with the occasional brushed-steel bunker or pill-box.

[quote] The art design was incredibly lazy. Every wall, every building, and person looked exactly the damn same. [/quote]

[quote]I could say the same about Mass Effect 3
I disagree with you, each character looked different if you actually payed attention. You are exagerating everything: Illos, Noveria, and the Citadel all looked different. [/quote]

That's IT though, Those three places were the only things that looked unique to themselves. Once you got into the rest of the game, it was all the same brushed steel and matte on every single planet all over the galaxy.


[quote] I'm not talking about resolution or polygon counts. I'm talking about the armor that looked like pajamas. [/quote]

[quote]You mean this?

-snip-

OR THIS

-snip-

-snip-

YEAH that is defnietly something that you would sleep in *sarcasm*.  These are the most bad ass looking armors ever. Even Tela Vasir from ME2 uses the Spectre armor.[/quote]

Way to cherry pick there. What about Ash's pink and white jammies? Also, the fact that 3/4s of the armor was just pallette swapped.

[quote] you don't get it. I'm not saying one is better than the other. I'm saying that each succeeded where the other failed. [/quote]

[quote]Lies[/quote]
Brilliant argument. Surely that will copnvince someone. /sarcasm

[quote] You really hate gears of war. I don't need to play it to know that the ME3 ammo mechanic WORKS. It's fun, regardless of what other games used it. [/quote]

[/quote]False, I dont hate gears of war. I HATE THE FACT that Mass Effect 3 tried to be like gears of war.

When Mass Effect 1 came out you couldnt compare it with GOW 1 they both were different. Both published by Microsoft Game Studios but they were different.

Non Linear TPSRPG vs a Linear TPS.

 Then ME3 comes along takes away lots of choices and basically makes everything linear by making me take certain missions when I didnt want to. This crossed the line that seperated GOW and ME.[quote]
First of all, ME3 is still an RPG, and unless they do away with the leveling and point allocation, it will still be an RPG.
So you hate that they took a working mechanic, to replace a broken one? 

I'll give you the linearity, I don't like linearity either. 





[quote] Here's the thing, yes, the citadel was bigger. It was also tedious and full of useless corridors and empty space. [/quote]

[quote]You were obviosly to lazy to play the side missions on the citadel. You would find out that every alley, room and space was used at some point. [/quote]
but WHY? For instance the corridor where you find the volus who was working with chorbin. There was no reason for that space to exist. They could have put him somewhere else with NO detriment to the game. The only result would be less jogging around looking for little red circles. 

[quote] I'm amazed that you expect anyone to take you seriously when you praise the elevators. the elevators were just like real elevators. Boring wasts of time. Maybe you should get a decent computer, because my loading screens have never been even a quarter as long as one of those godforsaken elevator rides.[/quote]

[quote]Elevators are still better than a loading screen. Oh by the way I dont play Mass Effect on PC.

But my 11.6 inch laptop is still powerful enough to run Battlefield 3 on Ultra... High is better for it though.

CPU: I5 3210 , 8 GB RAM , GPU: GT 650M

I am way over the requirments of ME3.... I would literally kill it. [/quote]
Then why are you complaining about loading screens? I haven't seen a loading screen for more than two seconds since i got my current machine two and a half years ago. 

The elevators were the same speed regardless of your computer. A loading screen is fine, when it actually DECREASES the amount of time you spend waiting to play. 


[quote] Bioware removed these things because they were trimming the fat. Less jogging back and forth, more playing games. [/quote]

[quote]I literally found myself falling asleep while playing Mass Effect 3. There was actually more jogging back and forth doing those stupid FED EX delivery missions on the citadel. ME1 had something called rapid transit.... you ever heard of it? [/quote]
Seriously.. did you play once, and expect to know where everything was the first time? You only have to run through the citadel a couple times. 

[quote] ME3 clunky? What are you even talking about. The spacebar use was hard to adapt to at first, but ME3 was slick and fast paced. [/quote]

[quote]ME3 is far from slick, movements are not fluid and shooting doesnt feel natural or realistic often times I see my bullets literally passing through enemies and doing no damage. ME3 shouldnt have tried so hard at action becuase it failed. [/quote]Sales say you're wrong. So does its popularity. Maybe it's you who need to check their skill. When you see your bullet "pass through enemies" You're seeing them pass through the trail behind your bullet. Because you missed. 

[quote] The difference is that the factions in ME3 were fleshed out, and required different solutions to each problem. [/quote]

[quote]Wrong... lets see this is how you kill Cerburus, Repeas and Geth. You can shoot them, Biotic Explosion, Tech powers that is it.

Basically you just shoot and use powers and this works against all factions.

There is no special method to deal with any of them.... everything works. Why? Becuase Cerburus, Repears and Geth are the most boring and simplistic unit's in Mass Effect history.  [/quote]
So, what you're saying is that "you have to play the game at them to beat them" Of course you have to shoot them and use powers at them. THOSE ARE THE ONLY WAYS TO DO DAMAGE. 

You still have to get around the cerberus shields, duck Ravager shots, avoid brutes and take out banshees before they get to you. ME1 enemies were all damn near identicle. 



You never needed powers in ME1, though. Hug a corner, and shoot forever with your infinite ammo assault rifle.



[quote] All of these displayed  the exact same very limited behaviour. The only things affecting difficulty in involvements with them were their numbers, and what color pajamas they were wearing. [/quote]

[quote]So you are saying a biotic Asari Commando or biotic terrorist is the same as a human thug with a pistol.... you are blind or you are oblivious to what biotics actually are. Have you even fought a Krogan Warlord or Battlemaster before? They dont just hide behind crates.

You would get destroyed on Insanity if you got hit by a sniper rifle on early levels..... seriosly one shot and your gone!!!! That doesnt happen in ME3.[/quote]
Practically, yes, i am. They all behave exactly the same. occasionally some of them will throw biotics at you, which almost always miss if you use cover.

Why did they save ALL of the different AI behaviours for ONLY the most difficult level? That's a HUGE design flaw. 

Also, one hit kills without warning aren't a good thing. 

[quote] "Husks," same as the others, excet it doesn't hide when you start shooting it.

"Varren, Rachni," Sure, they're different, but they aren't a real threat, ever. Feels more like pest control than combat.

"Thresher Maws(on uncharted planets)", nothing involving the mako will ever be considered a positive. [/quote]

[qoute]Husks are the same on ME3.

Rachni are a threat above casual. Since you never played insanity of course Rachni dont seem like a theat to you. How about you ask the Salarians why they needed help of the Krogan.

Nothing involving your driving skills will ever be considred positive. Seriosly learn to drive the Mako and NO you cant climb 90 degree cliffs with it.  [/quote]
No they aren't. The rachni are most definitely NOT a threat. It's possible that they're a threat in insanity, but i'm not going to go trudge through all of that again just to find out. 

I have no idea why they needed the krogan to help with the salarians, but it certainly wasn't because they were strong, smart, or hard to kill. 

Also, did you seriously just DEFEND the driving of the mako? That's a new low. 

[quote] Gameplay in ME1 : "hug a corner and shoot at people until they fall down" is the universal solution to every situation aside from Geth Armatures. On rare occasions, the cornere isn't even necessary. [/quote]

[quote]No in higher diffuclties you have to use strategy. Often times you have to command your squad to watch left and right and prevent enemy flanks. There are more types of units to deal with in ME1. There were snipers in ME1, there were rocket troopers in ME1... and
there were shields, barriers and health in ME1. There were heavy geth
units Geth Prime and Geth Juggernaught. Then you had Krogan and they dont hide. [/quote]
All of those things were in ME3. [/quote]

The only one of those units to ever require a different approach were the snipers. Unless you were a sniper too, in which case you could use the same strategy.


"more types of units" doesn't hold water when they all behave the same. The fact that the krogan don't hide just made them easier to kill, though. 

[quote] Gameplay in ME3: "sit in cover and use one skill/ammo type to break shields and barrriers", "Take down the fodder", "Target the snipers/rocket soldiers", "Snipe the shield bearers", "prioritize brutes/banshees" etc. etc. [/quote]

So essentually gameplay in ME3 is also sit in a corner and shoot at things until they die. Yeah that sounds special.

[quote]
[*]ME1 experience = Only primary missions are worth doing
[*]ME3 experience = all missions contain entertainment value
[*]ME1 experience = Adventure[*]ME3 experience = Adventure, as long as you aren't some creeptastic VG hipster.[*]ME1 story = Manual Choices[*]ME3 story= You have to set the game to auto-choose for you, numb nuts. [*]ME1 combat = Guns were AWFUL. 
[*]ME3 combat = Guns WORKED LIKE GUNS[*]ME1 = Same enemies over and over, just pallette swapped, and occasionally with slower moving projectiles.
[*]ME3 = Same enemies over and over again. Except for the part where they had different behaviours, appearances, and capabilities.
[*]ME1 = good story and ending
[*]ME3 = Story was passable, right up until the last half hour.
[*]ME1 side missions = Uncharted Planets and facilities and more side missions, all of which were identicle, and useless.
[*]ME3 side missions = Goals, accomplishments, and unique equipment
[*]ME1 = Great story, poor gameplay
[*]ME3 =  Poor story, great gameplay[*]



The only things in ME 3 that need fixing are the plot, and some of the spacebar functions should be split to other keys. And the association with EA. Not for content reasons, but for the "Connecting to EA servers" wait time problem . [/quote]

[quote]ME3 needs more fixing than that. Guns did not work like guns... especially when you can see the projectile go through an enemy. and do no damage.[/quote] That's either a bug, or you're missing and looking at enemies that moved into the bullrt trail. It's not something that happens when your game is working properly. 

[quote]ME1 had more enemies than ME3 did hands down and no it was not just texture swaps. [/quote]Yes it was. You can slap a different texture on them, but if it behaves the same, it's not a "different" enemy. 

[quote]In ME3 there are many times when the game DOES NOT allow you to make a choice regardless of auto choices or not. I did not have auto choices on, but there was a lack of choices compared to ME1. [/quote]Only things that are necessary to continue the plot. I mean, if you really didn't want the game to progress, you could always just stop playing. 

[quote]Guns were great in ME1.. if you know how to shoot. [/quote]No, they REALLY were not. And don't try to say "oh it's because you're bad at video games!" again. The combat was BAD. even compared to other games of that time. 

[quote]ME3=Horrible story from begining to end.
Yes even the very beggining of ME3 was horrible, awkward and had no energy. Not to mention those voice actors were HORRIBLE during Shepards court thing.[/quote]Not really. Maybe if you go from the A rate story of ME1 and compare it to the story of 3, but standing on it's own, the story of 3 was passable, and included some very good bits, that were largely spoiled by the ending. 

[quote]ME1 planets were different.... terain was different, colors were different even the sky was different. You just were to lazy to explore and pay attention.ME3 side missions=Fed Ex delivery. and what goals and rewards.... a number that increases War Assets.[/quote] There were only a handful of planets that had "different" terrain. The vast majority of them were the exact same type of terrain. Everything else was just pallette swaps. As far as ME3 sidequests go, the sidequests were fine, as long as you didn't try to do them one at a time. You're supposed to go through the game and drop those off when you're going to be there anyway, not stop everything you're doing just to go back to the citadel and drop off a maguffin. 

[quote]War Assets ended up being basically USELESS in the ending of the game..you still get a crappy ending either way.
[/quote]You can whine about it all you want, but nobody is saying that ME3 had a good ending. I'm arguing about mechanics. 

[Kadi]

Well this is a good question but odds that He or any of bioware would read this far in to this thread are slim, But i'll go along with it.
Considering the Ending of the previous trilogy, the setting is what bothers me the most, will the reaper war be a throw away line? "Shepard stopped the reaper invasion" Will they make a new game taking into account how you ended the previous game?
Next I would like to look at Races, I want to try another race. one thing Mass effect did brilliant was exploring alien life, and culture(especially this) The Quarians was so interesting, the Krogan were fun to read and talk about too. so much of the lore is great. But now I would like to play another race too, Imagine it, An Asari Justicar as she glides through the galaxy hunting her prey, in this we get to meet and explore. but the endgame being nothing as grand a scale as the current triogy ofcourse. and its not like there isnt alot to choose from, we have the council races and those who arent. Personally id love to see more races who were deemed too primitive/protected by citadel council's regulations. maybe something that isnt Bipedal etc etc. So Deffinatley a few races to choose, and lots of culture and lore on races and settings.
AS far as where would it be set, and who would be in it, that all depends on where the developers would like to go, be it set 100 years later, then who would be in it. Maybe it could be set before, like the early days of our cycle, with the Asari Turians, and that. who knows.
aslong as they give me choices, keep the elements that made me2-3 great for me, i will be happy.  but more playable races and genders.

(Edited for a spoiler i placed, forgot which forum i was in)

Modifié par Eleventhchild, 26 mars 2013 - 08:27 .