Xena_Shepard wrote...
marshalleck wrote...
Xena_Shepard wrote...
I don't know how they think they could get away with all these "changes" that people ****ed about wanting on the threads (which in reality screw up the game's awesomeness)
I think you're making some tenuous assumptions here.
http://social.biowar...926/polls/1180/ suggests to me that the changes are being well-received by players who don't necessarily feel the need to contribute to forum wars.
Oh I have no doubt the shooter fans are perfectly happy, however BioWare's core fangroup are RPG fans.
Well, I'm an RPG gamer through and through, and even I don't really have a problem with the changes they've made. It doesn't look like they really removed much that wasn't already superfluous, just changed a few things around. For example:
"They lowered the number of weapons". However, in actuality they didn't because there were only two models of each weapon type in ME1 anyway, and they've added new weapon types and made them all more customisable. Not worse, just different, and in some ways better.
"They took away the ability to change your squadmates' armour". Except in ME1 choosing armour was extremely limited (only whole armour sets, rarer Quarian, Krogan and Turian armours, etc) and all the armour was reasonably generic looking. Now each squadmate has their own unique armours which are specifically made to fit their character designs (which for some characters is better than ME1. For example, Tali only had 6 or so armours in the entirety of ME1, and all of them looked the same). Not really worse, just different. On top of that, Shepard's armour system is completely overhauled and offers
far more customisation options for both roleplaying (changing his armour's appearance) and stat increases. This is much more RPGish than the armour of ME1.
"There are fewer abilities, and the abilities have fewer levels to upgrade. ME2 has been dumbed down". Except the majority of the abilities that were removed weren't great. They provided neglegable passive upgrades and the occasional unlock, which meant that you often had to dump points into a skill that you didn't really need except as a prerequisite for a new ability unlock. Also, the fact that you had to spend so many points on a weapon talent just to be able to hit the broad side of a barn wasn't particularly fun, especially as ME1's combat was attempting to be a shooter/RPG hybrid. To add insult to injury, if you wanted to give Garrus a sniper rifle, for example, you had to dump loads of skillpoints into assault rifles - completely pointless if you planned to make him a dedicated sniper. ME1's skill trees were a nightmare of dump stats. In ME2, every time you purchase the next level of a skill it has a noticable effect upon the way that skill works, and often gives you other secondary perks as well. On top of that, you can turn each skill into one of two specialised versions once you max it out. What Bioware have done to the skill system is the definition of streamlining, and I think that it can only make the game play better as a whole. Yes, they made things less complex, but it seems to me that they only removed
needless complexities.
IMO Mass Effect 2 may
seem like less of an RPG in its combat, but even speaking as an RPG lover I can see that the changes they've made look to make the game play better. The Mass Effect series was always meant to be an Action RPG series. The core of the game, the dialogue, the choices you can make and the way you can customise and shape your Shepard, and the focus on story and characters doesn't look to have changed, so I really don't think there's anything to worry about.
Modifié par Gill Kaiser, 17 janvier 2010 - 11:50 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
