86 réponses à ce sujet

[sharkboy421]

crimzontearz wrote...

Never said it would not require balancing Brennan

Also, exclusivity might help

Now this is interesting.  The one concern I have with your idea of different categories is the idea that everyone can have access to Biotics.  This is supposed to be a rare thing and the game gave reasons why Shepard could use them as either her main class or from a bonus power. 

I could see picking like a background choice that might give a bonus to some categories.  That could lead to some very unique builds.

[Ruadh]

I'm more concerned of the possible use of the megaderp lore bummings that were introduced in MP.

Crap like awakened collectors and ANY kind of frontline combat Volus. If anybody working on the new game fights to make this BS legit, they should be taken out back and beaten with lore sticks.*

*Lore sticks are the same as normal sticks, except they have little nuggets of lore written upon them. Like, 'Volus would literally explode if they were shot.'

[crimzontearz]

Guys bear with me I cannot use advanced forms for posting.

So: James - no, the way you approach the game is based on how you upgrade your character, as I said LIMITATION in how much you can upgrade vs what you wish to use results in you crafting your own class without being able to do EVERYTHING

Sanunes - no, by exclusivity I mean "upgrade A excludes power B"...or better yet also attach a "draw" value on upgrades and powers and, depending on level and armor you can only equip or use a certain number of upgrades so the most OP combos are not possible

Psychevore - I played cyberpunk, MERPG, Ars Magica, AD&D and all WOD games as well as scores of CRPG from Planescape to Redemption to Diablo to Baldur's gate (including the console ones). Throwing math at your opponent is good but streamlining redundant math while maintaining the underlying depth is the name of the game for me, it was fine VERY well by white wolf with their second World Of Darkness serie. To me RPGs are about immersion, I would rather see everything from my character's point of view and experience it all as my character rather than see my character's appearance. It is a matter of tastes

Lastly if that is not possible (first person view) the character better have Ryse level facial animation and delivery tyvm

[sharkboy421]

crimzontearz wrote...

To me RPGs are about immersion, I would rather see everything from my character's point of view and experience it all as my character rather than see my character's appearance. It is a matter of tastes

Lastly if that is not possible (first person view) the character better have Ryse level facial animation and delivery tyvm

I suppose this all comes down to a matter of taste but I at times find first very un-immersive, especially if the character is silent. 

The best example I can think of is Borderlands 2.  I thought the writing and story in the game was great and I loved the characters but I constantly felt like just an observer.  But then in Bioshock Infinite, I never leave Booker's persepective and yet he still spoke and that added so much to the immersion of the game.

I guess it might be different in an rpg where you have a lot more control over your character and the path the story takes though.

And I see no reason why the next ME won't have those amazing facial graphics, at least on PC and next gen.

[crimzontearz]

Yeah no silent protagonist TYVM

[JamesFaith]

crimzontearz wrote...

So: James - no, the way you approach the game is based on how you upgrade your character, as I said LIMITATION in how much you can upgrade vs what you wish to use results in you crafting your own class without being able to do EVERYTHING

I undestand your suggest about limitation but my problem is tendency to stick with few subjectively best abilities. I already played such game so I'm speaking from experience here.

I try to show it on example of Baldurs Gate 2.

If your system would be here, i would nearly everytime end with some thief-like character, even if I try some mage skills at the beginning, because I prefer sneaking approach and such. It was only classes system which "force" me to try also fighter and mage approach + their variations and only thanks to such system were every of 12 playthrough more unique for me. 

[crimzontearz]

I fail to see that as a negative, you CHOOSE to play as a non thief and you can choose to play with a subjectively sub optimal selection of skills if you wish so. Tho I wonder why anyone would do that, I never play as full casters, I hate it and I would never subject myself to a forced pure castser play through when other classes appeal more to me

[cap and gown]

I would say one of the very good things about MP is the limited number skill sets of each character, yet the very wide variety of characters available. It makes you want to try out different characters to see how they work. The Krogan Soldier: Melee. Asari Valkyrie: hit an run. Vanguard: charge, shoot, charge. Each character lets you experiment with a different style of play. If there was one set of skills that everyone could pick from, that desire to try out different classes would vanish. It would reduce replayability.

[AlexMBrennan]

that desire to try out different classes would vanish. It would reduce replayability.

Duh, if they remove classes then there won't be different classes.

Your next point is a non-sequitur however because there will still be different character builds; if you are happy to forever play the same character once you have found something that works (which you imply when you say it would reduce replayability) then having multiple classes should not have made any difference because you would have been happy to endlessly replay the game with the first class you unlocked.

[JamesFaith]

crimzontearz wrote...

I fail to see that as a negative, you CHOOSE to play as a non thief and you can choose to play with a subjectively sub optimal selection of skills if you wish so. Tho I wonder why anyone would do that, I never play as full casters, I hate it and I would never subject myself to a forced pure castser play through when other classes appeal more to me

Yes, you can choose play as non thief, but when you latter chosing between new skills, you often end with old known preffered ones and don't try something new, sometimes even not deliberately, but subconsciously. And result is nearly same playthrough.

But with classes you deliberately restricting yourself from some of these subjectively best abilities and game then becoming new challenge, because your assetts are drastically different.

With Difficulty setting is Class setting best way how to create new challenges for me.

[crimzontearz]

And with my system you deliberately limit yourself as well. You know that freedom you have at the character selection screen when you move your mouse from thief to warrior? You have the SAME freedom to move your mouse from cloak to melee servos in.the upgrade skill screen


Imagine that

[cap and gown]

I suppose it is a matter of discipline, but I agree with James Faith. Classes force me into a skill set and force me into rethinking how I play.

The big difference, however, is that in MP it is just one match. Try it out. See if you like it. In SP it is a very long campaign, and sitting through 15 minutes of cut scenes just to try out the class for a bit is asking for a lot. OTOH, maybe it makes you want to commit to trying to make that class work. Maybe it might even grow on you.

[Rasofe]

Personally, if I have to take cover in SP it's because I made a mistake.

Footnote: Unless it's my failshepard Adept. Then I have no choice.

P.S. If no one can tell I'm just outright lying/braggarting, I'd just like to add that I'm not telling the truth.

Modifié par Rasofe, 27 novembre 2013 - 05:25 .

[Malanek]

In general the MP gameplay is far far superior to single player gameplay. You don't have to take cover in SP either and it would actually be faster in most cases if you didn't. One big decision they have to make is whether to retain the concept of right hand advantage. That's the biggest factor on how often cover will be used.

[AlanC9]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

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.

Yeah, that's the traditional problem with classless systems. They work fine in PnP where the GM can veto builds, but classless CRPGs are almost always exploitable.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing. I prefer exploiting the hell out of the system in a TES game, for instance. But ME is about challenging combats and TES games are not.

[JamesFaith]

crimzontearz wrote...

And with my system you deliberately limit yourself as well. You know that freedom you have at the character selection screen when you move your mouse from thief to warrior? You have the SAME freedom to move your mouse from cloak to melee servos in.the upgrade skill screen


Imagine that

I don't need to imagine this. As I already wrote, I play such designed RPGs and it didn't work.

[Rasofe]

Then again we could go back to the Half Life model with 100 health, 100 armor and hiding behind walls being completely optional.

Okay, I'm really not contributing am I...
There's just really not much to say. I like that ME1, ME2 and ME3 are different in their different ways. It means that I don't get bored with a trilogy playthrough even when I'm just playing one class.
E.G. Soldier Shepard is an invincible wall in ME1. in ME2 it's all about near-death experiences charging to a cover right in front of Harby, and in ME3 it's about mowing down enemies while slowly walking forward with the Revenant... nice...
'Course I'm playing three right now, but that's just because I'm an intensity junkie.

Modifié par Rasofe, 27 novembre 2013 - 05:56 .

[crimzontearz]

Personally, if I have to take cover in SP it's because I made a mistake.

Footnote: Unless it's my failshepard Adept. Then I have no choice.

P.S. If no one can tell I'm just outright lying/braggarting, I'd just like to add that I'm not telling the truth.

With my versatile vanguard Shepard I nearly never take cover....no lie

[crimzontearz]

I don't need to imagine this. As I already wrote, I play such designed RPGs and it didn't work.

Not my fault you lack resolve

[JamesFaith]

crimzontearz wrote...

I don't need to imagine this. As I already wrote, I play such designed RPGs and it didn't work.

Not my fault you lack resolve

And here we are, arguments are simplified and again pushed to personal level.

Not suprising.

[Rasofe]

Vanguards and Sentinels are broken anyway, for their own respective reasons.
Mostly because of biotic explosions, but also becaus they have their solutions for everything that doesn't get gibbed by biotics. Adepts don't get that luxury, you just end up with a lot of abilities that do slightly different things and try to biotic-explode your way through the game.

Modifié par Rasofe, 27 novembre 2013 - 06:16 .

[crimzontearz]

And here we are, arguments are simplified and again pushed to personal level.

Not suprising.

You lack the resolve to restrict yourself without a one time original choice, it IS a personal problem.

[Rasofe]

What's the argument again? I lost track when you stared talking about thieves and warriors.

[JamesFaith]

Rasofe wrote...

What's the argument again? I lost track when you stared talking about thieves and warriors.

In brief - player without restriction of class and free access to all abilities have often tendency to stick with his "ideal" formula and missing challenges connected with restriction to different set of skill (different class).