86 réponses à ce sujet

[cap and gown]

ME3 has the best cover and movement mechanics of all the ME games. It makes going back to ME1 feel like swallowing a razor and then drinking acid. So I hope that the MP designers have nothing to do with designing enemies in ME4 and later games. Cover means almost nothing in MP. You almost never take cover. And the designers made sure of this by introducing new cover breaking enemies such as Dragoons and Bombers. I suppose I understand not wanting people to just camp out and snipe away, but what, pray tell, is the point of having all these well developed cover mechanics if you don't actually want the player to ever take cover? Get your story straight. Either make this a cover based game, or ditch the whole idea and turn it into an FPS melee fest.

[essarr71]

Are there bombers and dragoons in SP?

[cap and gown]

Only in the Arena

[essarr71]

Eh.. Cover will always rule so long as SP sticks to corridors. MP is designed differently for good reason. Getting chased out of cover isnt a bad thing, tho. ME2 was essentially "pick a box and shoot from it until everything is dead".

[cap and gown]

essarr71 wrote...

Eh.. Cover will always rule so long as SP sticks to corridors. MP is designed differently for good reason. Getting chased out of cover isnt a bad thing, tho. ME2 was essentially "pick a box and shoot from it until everything is dead".

That was mostly because of the less than stellar enemy AI. If they had held to cover and laid down suppressive fire then you might get some fire and movement tactics come into play. (Which is where I would like to see the series evolve.)

[crimzontearz]

ME3 has the best cover and movement mechanics of all the ME games. It makes going back to ME1 feel like swallowing a razor and then drinking acid. So I hope that the MP designers have nothing to do with designing enemies in ME4 and later games. Cover means almost nothing in MP. You almost never take cover. And the designers made sure of this by introducing new cover breaking enemies such as Dragoons and Bombers. I suppose I understand not wanting people to just camp out and snipe away, but what, pray tell, is the point of having all these well developed cover mechanics if you don't actually want the player to ever take cover? Get your story straight. Either make this a cover based game, or ditch the whole idea and turn it into an FPS melee fest.

One of the main guys designing enemies is Brenon Holmes, he is not (last I checked) working on ME4 and neither is his team, so in all likelihood yes, the people from ME3 MP are designing enemy mechanics in ME4

[KiriKaeshi]

inb4l2p

Going back to me3SP after MP is like eating razors, and what not....

[sharkboy421]

Cover busting units are fine.  It forces you to keep awareness and actually move cover spots at times. 

But the MP battles are so vastly different than the SP battles.  In MP, mobility is king because you are in an arena and enemies can come from all sides.  In SP, even with wide open areas, the battles are generally "linear" in that enemies only come from one direction. 

If you only have one direction to worry about then taking cover will always be the optimal thing to do.  Its the same in Gears of War.  If you know where the enemy is, take hard cover from a spot that gives you a good field of fire.  If they can come from any angle, then you need to take advantage of soft cover and staying mobile.

Also the units in ME3 like Bombers and Dragoons were designed specifically to counter farmers who would camp and never move.  I don't think we'll see quite such drastic units in the next ME, but I do hope we get improved AI that will use grenades to force you to move and actually flank you properly.

[crimzontearz]

I say rework the whole game play in ME4 and take a freaking clue from Crysis3

[sharkboy421]

crimzontearz wrote...

I say rework the whole game play in ME4 and take a freaking clue from Crysis3

In what way?  I agree the fairly wide open environments that allow for multiple approaches would be a great thing to do.  But what other ideas did you have in mind?

[crimzontearz]

In what way? I agree the fairly wide open environments that allow for multiple approaches would be a great thing to do. But what other ideas did you have in mind?

Remove classes, allow for a limited upgrade pool in a LARGE skill/power up selection. Rebalance the "throwing math at an opponent vs game play effect" of the powers/skills

Make skills, tech upgrades and weapon mods GAME CHANGERS (like in crysis 3) and not just progressively improving effects


And if possible first person view for combat

[sharkboy421]

crimzontearz wrote...

Remove classes, allow for a limited upgrade pool in a LARGE skill/power up selection. Rebalance the "throwing math at an opponent vs game play effect" of the powers/skills

Make skills, tech upgrades and weapon mods GAME CHANGERS (like in crysis 3) and not just progressively improving effects

And if possible first person view for combat

Hmm, those would be interesting changes.

I personally though would prefer not to see classes removed. 

I do like the idea though of having a bit more of a limited upgrade pool.  In ME3 it was unfortunate that by level 60 you could have all but one skill maxed out. 

And again, personal preference but I would vastly prefer ME4 kept the third person combat. 

[crimzontearz]

Why not remove classes? It would vastly improve game play.

Let me as you a question, which one is your favorite class and why? And how do you approach game play with it?

[sharkboy421]

crimzontearz wrote...

Why not remove classes? It would vastly improve game play.

Let me as you a question, which one is your favorite class and why? And how do you approach game play with it?

I'm not sure I understand how it would improve gameplay.  But to answer your questions:

Soldier is my favorite class and as a soldier I use Shepard as the main source of damage for the group while I pick squadmates who can pick up the slack in crowd control and defense stripping.  Generally this means I bring a Tech character and a Biotic character with me.

I'll try to keep Shepard as in front of my squaddies as possible as I can deal with getting hit and it makes it easier to focus my weapons fire.  Plus squaddie powers are instant when they are offscreen but that is true for anything.

However when I play as an adept, my second favorite, I'll play much more conservatively and try to keep the entire squad at a longer range.  And I will pick squadmates whose powers either combo with mine and allow for greater CC and AOE damage from combos.

While in both cases I still go by "the best defense is a good offense", as a soldier its just straight up damage with some support and as an adept its focusing on CC, AOEs and power/class synergy.

I suppose it could all just be semantics in my head, but playing different classes does at least feel very different to me and I would like to keep that in future games.

[KiriKaeshi]

crimzontearz wrote...

Why not remove classes? It would vastly improve game play.

Really, why not. Bioware is obviously trying their best to get rid of their original fans. It could go either way, towards RPG or FPS. Depends on target audience, I guess.
It would work for me, I could finally leave mess effect alone.

Modifié par KiriKaeshi, 27 novembre 2013 - 03:06 .

[Sanunes]

crimzontearz wrote...

Why not remove classes? It would vastly improve game play.

Let me as you a question, which one is your favorite class and why? And how do you approach game play with it?

The problem I have with removing classes is that any ability that might be considered too powerful would disappear or would get its power reduced to make it balanced with all the other abilities in the game like what happened between Mass Effect 1 and Mass Effect 2 with Biotics.  For I rather have classes in the game then not have something like Charge or Singularity.

If they were to allow a few of the lowered abilities that don't define the class and expand the bonus powers so you could have more then one I think it would be a better approach.  An example would be the Soldier, instead of giving them any ammo abilities they are all considered bonus powers so they would have three slots where they could pick an ammo power or something that was considered an ability with equal strength.

[crimzontearz]

Ok, so, my idea is to have 3 major upgrades categories

Armor, Biotics, Tech

Each of them with upgrades you can purchase through leveling up but in a limited way (say there are 100 possible upgrades even at a maxed out level you can only buy 25 or something along those lines)

So, Armor for instance, you might have "unflinching" skill which negates knockback/unscoping, Medigel upgrades, Damage Hardening (past the shields), cloak, Melee servos, aiming stabilizers Weapon slots and so on.

Tech: Overshield, Hacking, Sabotaging, Synthetic Self Destruct, Drone, sound suppression and so on

Biotics: over barrier, Stasis, push/pull/lift (and environmental attacks), Singularity, jump, fall break, slowdown,

That way you CAN play exactly as you want, maximizing your character OR being able to do a little bit of everything adding variety to the game play which is an awesome thing

[crimzontearz]

How does no class = less of an RPG? Some people need to stop playing D20 games ad start playing using the D10 storytelling system

[Farangbaa]

crimzontearz wrote...

In what way? I agree the fairly wide open environments that allow for multiple approaches would be a great thing to do. But what other ideas did you have in mind?

Remove classes, allow for a limited upgrade pool in a LARGE skill/power up selection. Rebalance the "throwing math at an opponent vs game play effect" of the powers/skills

Make skills, tech upgrades and weapon mods GAME CHANGERS (like in crysis 3) and not just progressively improving effects


And if possible first person view for combat

How about you go play some Call of Duty instead?

[AlexMBrennan]

Ok, so, my idea is to have 3 major upgrades categories

Problem is that this will exponentially increase the number of OP combos, which will drastically unbalance the game and/or result in players hating the developers for nerfing their favourite powers.

Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 27 novembre 2013 - 03:29 .

[crimzontearz]

Your limited view on RPGs is disheartening

[crimzontearz]

Never said it would not require balancing Brennan

Also, exclusivity might help

[JamesFaith]

crimzontearz wrote...

That way you CAN play exactly as you want, maximizing your character OR being able to do a little bit of everything adding variety to the game play which is an awesome thing

Which is exactly what I don't want.

For me different classes = different approach to game. My abilities options are limited by class so I have to looking for new way how to balance my character with every new class.

But with some huge skill trees accessible for everyone there would always be tendency to choose just few popular opton (sniper rifle in my case) and feeling of challenge with new game would be quickly gone.

[Sanunes]

crimzontearz wrote...

Never said it would not require balancing Brennan

Also, exclusivity might help

Wouldn't adding exclusivity start pre-defining the character like having a class? Maybe I am just not seeing it the same way as you are.

[Farangbaa]

I don't like this development in games where in RPGs I play in first person. I want to see the beautiful being I spent a good amount of time on creating. And what's the fun in using throw/pull/singulairy if you don't even see the animation, it just pops out in front you when you press a button?

I don't like this development in RPGs where there's ever less menus and stats. Give me MORE menus and MORE stats. I want to spend a good amount of time on the level up screen. I want to spend a lot of time thinking where I'm going to go with this character. Think.. Neverwinter Nights, in which I, without a doubt, spent more time creating characters on paper/in a mod with quick leveling than I spent playing the actual game.

I must be getting old, but I hated ME2 for what they did to the leveling. ME3 was an improvement in the good direction. Don't dumb it down even more.

edit: syntax.

Modifié par Psychevore, 27 novembre 2013 - 03:40 .