208 réponses à ce sujet

[thehomeworld]

Short answer: YES

[Iakus]

thehomeworld wrote...

Short answer: YES

Long answer , YES PLEASE!

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

About the only thing that deprives me of role playing properly is the lack of being able to make a proper Michael Bay explosion with the Cain every mission. I know pyrotechnics are expensive, but these are digital, right? So they're cheap, and we should be able to make them, right?

Pew pew with a gun sucks, but imagine being able to hang back and hit Kai Leng with a Cain in that Temple. Of course there goes the VI, but TIM doesn't get it either. And it didn't really matter in the end anyway.

[Binary_Helix 1]

grey_wind wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

DrGunjah wrote...

LucasShark wrote...
I was beginning to think I was alone in preferring ME2's combat.

what exactly was better in ME2 combat?
Imho it felt... unfinished. Especially only having 2 (later 3) skills per squadmate (half of them being useless on insanity) felt odd after playing ME1.

The movement and flow of ME3 combat was vastly superior to ME2.  However in ME3, almost all of the enemies lacked some type of defense layer.  That was one of the features that set ME2 combat apart and made it rpg-ish.  You needed Overload to deal with shields so enemies would be vunerable to to your other powers.  Or you needed Warp to deal with barriers or Incinerate to deal with armor.  The difference between synthetic and organic health could also affect what ammo you chose.  For instance, I play as soldier so anytime I face geth, I swap to Disruptor ammo.  Against most else I use Inferno.  But when it comes to Collectors I prefer to spec into Warp ammo.

This sort of rock-paper-scissors scheme kind of reminded me of the elemental immunities and weakness ins Dragon Age and other rpgs.  Even playing as the basic soldier, ME2 combat felt much different than say Gears of War due in large part to the different protections and damage multipliers.  ME3 lost that uniqueness with the lack of protections for enemies.

I also find that biotics and tech attacks are grossly overpowered in ME3, and combo explosions allow you to go entire levels just spamming power after power. Plus the weight system is a completely broken, horrid mess.

ME3 is horribly balanced and was dumbed down and made easy because caster players on BSN successfully whined.

ME2 was the pinnacle of the trilogy. Good class balance, stronger shooter aspects, and high difficulty, were absent in ME3.

[grey_wind]

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

sharkboy421 wrote...

DrGunjah wrote...

LucasShark wrote...
I was beginning to think I was alone in preferring ME2's combat.

what exactly was better in ME2 combat?
Imho it felt... unfinished. Especially only having 2 (later 3) skills per squadmate (half of them being useless on insanity) felt odd after playing ME1.

The movement and flow of ME3 combat was vastly superior to ME2.  However in ME3, almost all of the enemies lacked some type of defense layer.  That was one of the features that set ME2 combat apart and made it rpg-ish.  You needed Overload to deal with shields so enemies would be vunerable to to your other powers.  Or you needed Warp to deal with barriers or Incinerate to deal with armor.  The difference between synthetic and organic health could also affect what ammo you chose.  For instance, I play as soldier so anytime I face geth, I swap to Disruptor ammo.  Against most else I use Inferno.  But when it comes to Collectors I prefer to spec into Warp ammo.

This sort of rock-paper-scissors scheme kind of reminded me of the elemental immunities and weakness ins Dragon Age and other rpgs.  Even playing as the basic soldier, ME2 combat felt much different than say Gears of War due in large part to the different protections and damage multipliers.  ME3 lost that uniqueness with the lack of protections for enemies.

I also find that biotics and tech attacks are grossly overpowered in ME3, and combo explosions allow you to go entire levels just spamming power after power. Plus the weight system is a completely broken, horrid mess.

ME3 is horribly balanced and was dumbed down and made easy because caster players on BSN successfully whined.

ME2 was the pinnacle of the trilogy. Good class balance, stronger shooter aspects, and high difficulty, were absent in ME3.

I'm currently replaying ME2 (with no desire to import into ME3 ) as an Adept on Insanity. It's nowehere near as useless as people claim.
I get that they wanted to make ME3 more balanced and caster-friendly, and that's fine. But they went to a ridiculous extreme in the opposite direction.

[wright1978]

I want the RPG dialogue elements restored.

[xsdob]

As stated earlier, I want rpg conversations, choices, and to some extent side quest brought back. I want everything else to stay gone.

[zyntifox]

The only RP elements improvement i am passionately about is auto-dialogue and paraphrased dialogue. The key part of any RPG, in my opinion, is the player's possibility to define the character they are roleplaying. By having auto-dialogue there is a risk of the character saying or doing something that does not fit the character you are roleplaying. And even if they somehow manages to not break character during the auto-dialogue it is jarring to loose control over the character you are roleplaying.

The other issue i would like fixed/improved is the dialogue system. I don't care if you show the dialogue in a wheel, square or triangle just let me know exactly what the character i am roleplaying is going to say. Let us choose the dialogue response based on the context of the response not an approximation of the response and whether it is paragon or renegade.

[Ieldra]

Cstaf wrote...
The only RP elements improvement i am passionately about is auto-dialogue and paraphrased dialogue. The key part of any RPG, in my opinion, is the player's possibility to define the character they are roleplaying. By having auto-dialogue there is a risk of the character saying or doing something that does not fit the character you are roleplaying. And even if they somehow manages to not break character during the auto-dialogue it is jarring to loose control over the character you are roleplaying.

The other issue i would like fixed/improved is the dialogue system. I don't care if you show the dialogue in a wheel, square or triangle just let me know exactly what the character i am roleplaying is going to say. Let us choose the dialogue response based on the context of the response not an approximation of the response and whether it is paragon or renegade.

Exactly. That's the only RPG element I am passionate about as well. This idea of basing your dialogue choice on a very loosely defined concept connected with an unreflected gut reaction is so wrong that I feel it like a slap in the face every time I don't know what to select.

Also, I don't want only highly emotionally-imbued or moralistic options. I want options for characters who are slow to judge and think before they speak.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 12 novembre 2012 - 08:39 .

[CR121691]

And what is RPG to you? Playing with numbers?

[Comsky159]

I want more (or at least some) actual exploration back; try to recapture ME1's more expansive setting. Never cared much for stats etc though, ME3 hit the mark there for me.

[zyntifox]

Comsky159 wrote...

I want more (or at least some) actual exploration back; try to recapture ME1's more expansive setting. Never cared much for stats etc though, ME3 hit the mark there for me.

What does exploration have to do with roleplaying? Don't get me wrong, i like exploration but i don't like it because it enhances the RP-experience. In my opinion, stats does enhance the roleplaying. The reason why is due to the limitations of the medium to in any other way inform the player of certain characteristics. For example, if you have to be strong enough to carry and use a M-920 Cain. If we don't have stats reflecting, in this case, the character's strength we cannot know whether he/she can wield this particular weapon without just try and equip it.

Now, stats is not a requirement in a RPG but it does certaintly enhances the experience.

[EnvyTB075]

No, ME needs to become a bi-yearly title with PvP MP, pre-order bonus skins and a DoA: Beach Volleyball: Asari edition mini-game.

edit: The future of Mass Effect

-snip-

Super lame

Modifié par EnvyTB075, 12 novembre 2012 - 11:38 .

[SiriusXI]

Damn YES!

[Killdren88]

Oh my god, yes! I'm sick of games conforming to to the larger audiences of FPS. Dragon Age :Origins was perfect for me. ME 1 also very good. BUT Why does seem around the sequel to Bioware games (DA 2 ME 2) we are no longer able to gear our party?! Why is that a recurring theme?! I like to gear my party, and spec them just the way I like them. Not to mention this growing trend of focusing on the action rather than the whole story. Now I don't want to point any fingers *Looks at Ea with quiet disdain* but Bioware needs to go back to their roots and make good RPGS again thats what made them successful. Not pandering to all the FPS jockys out there. Bioware was about focusing on games for a specific group of people, but sadly they are slowly being pushed to conform. Quite sad really.

[DrGunjah]

sharkboy421 wrote...
The movement and flow of ME3 combat was vastly superior to ME2.  However in ME3, almost all of the enemies lacked some type of defense layer.  That was one of the features that set ME2 combat apart and made it rpg-ish.  You needed Overload to deal with shields so enemies would be vunerable to to your other powers.  Or you needed Warp to deal with barriers or Incinerate to deal with armor.  The difference between synthetic and organic health could also affect what ammo you chose.  For instance, I play as soldier so anytime I face geth, I swap to Disruptor ammo.  Against most else I use Inferno.  But when it comes to Collectors I prefer to spec into Warp ammo.

To be honest, I feel exactly the opposite way. Giving every enemy a defense layer (even ****ing varren have armor lol) is such a poor way of balancing. What's the point of crowd control when you have to shoot away a defense layer first? I could just kill the enemy then (that's what I actually do on ME2 insanity runs). Since you are talking about vulnerabilities - being prone to crowd control is a vulnerability too.
Though I agree, that the weight system in ME3 is unbalanced and the power combos are overpowered (warp->throw is so stupid...). I think these are the issues in ME3, not the lack of defense layers. Having 1 second cooldowns on biotics and making them detonate each other in devastating explosions is just stupid. A beta tester should have figured out after 5 minutes that this sh!t is not balanced.

[MrFob]

DrGunjah wrote...
To be honest, I feel exactly the opposite way. Giving every enemy a defense layer (even ****ing varren have armor lol) is such a poor way of balancing. What's the point of crowd control when you have to shoot away a defense layer first? I could just kill the enemy then (that's what I actually do on ME2 insanity runs). Since you are talking about vulnerabilities - being prone to crowd control is a vulnerability too.

To be fair, that was only the case on the two highest difficulty levels and on those, it's meant to be hard (I personally would have gone for tougher low level enemies without protection as well but still, it's called insanity after all). I thought the game was balanced really nicely on veteran.

Though I agree, that the weight system in ME3 is unbalanced and the power combos are overpowered (warp->throw is so stupid...). I think these are the issues in ME3, not the lack of defense layers. Having 1 second cooldowns on biotics and making them detonate each other in devastating explosions is just stupid. A beta tester should have figured out after 5 minutes that this sh!t is not balanced.

Agreed. The defence layers still exist after all. It's mainly a balancing issue.

[crimzontearz]

how about squad mates with skill trees as complex as the main character's? you know just a thought

[Lawrence0294]

Yes please.

[crimzontearz]

CR121691 wrote...

And what is RPG to you? Playing with numbers?

playing a role...building my character to my wishes and complement it with similarly built acillary characters

neither of which is handled well in ME3

[Village_Idiot]

Moar dialogue choices please.

[Nerevar-as]

grey_wind wrote...

I'm currently replaying ME2 (with no desire to import into ME3 ) as an Adept on Insanity. It's nowehere near as useless as people claim.
I get that they wanted to make ME3 more balanced and caster-friendly, and that's fine. But they went to a ridiculous extreme in the opposite direction.

It´s still the weakest. class, which did hurt considering it was by far the strongest in ME1. By the time you drop enemy defenses it´s more useful to keep shooting than use a biotic power. Singularity it´s almost useless, just briefly staggering enemies and dropping around 1/4 of their shileds. Shockwave is also rather useless. In ME3 biotics are fun again, but I think allowing detonations with any combination was going too far.

On topic, I do want character progression as detailed and complex as possible. I get why some people think choosing their conversations are what defines an RPG, but to me that part feels more like a "choosing your own adventure" book.

[ioannisdenton]

LucasShark wrote...

Yes, Yes, a thousand times yes!

I am so SICK of everything in gaming getting pushed askide for "accessability", see the rise of modern military shooters, and Skyrim's awful combat balance and system.

Nough said.

[CroGamer002]

Only RPG elements I want is actual Role Playing.


They can keep ME3 Gameplay as it is, just bring us back what we had in ME2 in dialogue choices and absolute reduction on auto-dialogue.

[ioannisdenton]

Nerevar-as wrote...

grey_wind wrote...

I'm currently replaying ME2 (with no desire to import into ME3 ) as an Adept on Insanity. It's nowehere near as useless as people claim.
I get that they wanted to make ME3 more balanced and caster-friendly, and that's fine. But they went to a ridiculous extreme in the opposite direction.

It´s still the weakest. class, which did hurt considering it was by far the strongest in ME1. By the time you drop enemy defenses it´s more useful to keep shooting than use a biotic power. Singularity it´s almost useless, just briefly staggering enemies and dropping around 1/4 of their shileds. Shockwave is also rather useless. In ME3 biotics are fun again, but I think allowing detonations with any combination was going too far.

On topic, I do want character progression as detailed and complex as possible. I get why some people think choosing their conversations are what defines an RPG, but to me that part feels more like a "choosing your own adventure" book.

Adept in Me2 is a lot more stratigically.
In me3 it literraly was a SPAM FEST. bring Liara and spam pulls singlarities and warps  at rediculous cooldowns.
Equip the weakest weapon cause you do not need it.
Me3 adept bore me to death. In me2 you had to plan on Who to attack biotically.
In Me3 enemies NOS SHIEDS and No barriers.
Damn  just bythinking of it i am so pissed off right now.
Whose idea was the NO shields thing?? Adept in Me3 was a boring piece of cake spamfest. There goes the anti-soldier anti-mainstream anti-CoD class.
somehow Adept in Me3 is way more spammier than soldier with adrenaline rush in Me2.