Aller au contenu

Photo

What Bioware should have done with Mass Effect


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
14 réponses à ce sujet

#1
Trank 209

Trank 209
  • Members
  • 21 messages
 So i think almost everyone can agree that both ME1 and ME2 had their problems, just talking gameplay. ME1 had to much sections with the Mako, and rather uninteresting, though sometimes alright world exploring. And ME2 had the damn scanning and probe stuff.

But lets talk about what was good about each game, and how Bioware should have made ME3.

ME1 had a better leveling system. ME2 made it too simple and boring. What was great about ME1 was you could put points into many different sections, like Spectre or whatever, though the weapon sections were not that good and felt dumb/pointless. Though ME2 did have the cool and better powers. I feel they should have combined both. Take some of the more useless sections that were in ME1 and put in the stuff like the ammo powers. Also ME1 had a much better item system in general. It was great getting so many different weapons and armor and upgrade from different companies and they all had their own little thing. ME2 made that way too simple as well. It wasn't as fun cause you could only pick from 3 or 4 different shotguns or pistols or whatever. Also i never understood why in ME2 they removed you being able to crouch whenever. It was annoying if you didnt want to get into cover all the way and only wanted to quickly get down for a quick moment. And of course ME1 had horrible sniping unless you put points into sniper, things like that were greatly improved upon and why they should remove the gun sections. 

But of course, the more focused side missions in ME2 were years better than most of the mako missions. But, it would have been really awesome if they had made much better and more focused Mako missions in ME2 and made more diverse levels and gameplay and improve the damn controls.

ME3 should have returned to the old leveling style, and mix up the point system and have it more diverse. The ability to put it into different slots in ME1 let the player have different playing style to their chosing and had them have to decide what to put it into. They needed to find a better way to get resources. Mix up the side missions with both the mako and regular ground missions. Though of course not have alot of mako missions and make it over stay its welcome. Return the ability to crouch. Have ME1 upgrade system back, and the diverse choice of what armor and weapons you could have. They needed to have more story and dailogue in the side missions as well in ME2.

Modifié par Trank 209, 06 janvier 2014 - 09:05 .


#2
Guest_npc86_*

Guest_npc86_*
  • Guests
I think ME2 got the most right overall. The only things I would change there would be to bring back the inventory and level of weapon/armour customisation that ME1 had. The inventory was good and just needed to be tidied up a bit but not to take the options out.

Planet scanning was okay but the chance of finding a hidden side mission made it a lot better. Maybe a few Mako missions with ME2 style areas on top of the existing missions would have mixed things up a bit. It would avoid the "Hey, haven't I been to this abandoned ship/merc base before?" feeling I get when I do a UNC mission in ME1.

In ME3 I would still keep the ME2 Journal and put the Codex back on the main menu instead of hiding it away. I'd bring the full dialogue wheel back from ME2 and the autodialogue back down to ME2 levels. Then take out the fetch quests since they didn't add anything to the game. The N7 side missions were good though and reminded me of the ones in ME2. It would have been nice to see more like them.

Modifié par AWT42, 06 janvier 2014 - 09:46 .


#3
Trank 209

Trank 209
  • Members
  • 21 messages
Yeah i agree with that overall. The ME1 inventory system just needed to be cleaned up a bit. ME3 did need the codex and journal back on the main menu. The dialogue wheel in ME2 was great.

And yeah the main problem with ME1 side missions was that they just recycled all the the assets, made it boring.

#4
NekkidNones

NekkidNones
  • Members
  • 994 messages
I don't know if I agree with using ME1's lvl'ing system for ME3. I find it interesting how diverse(in terms of strength and versatility) the powers in ME3 can end up being. Depending on the paths you choose in which to evolve your powahz. ME1s where pretty stright forward, with no variation to them, other than their affectivness/strength.
With that said; I'm a big fan of passive stats (as you appear to be as well). They're usually what I focus on increasing most. Typically nets the biggest bang for your buck, relatively speaking.

My beefs with ME3 are primarily with Creeper Shepard eavesdropping on people in order to pickup side quests, and the quest menus in general. It's a pretty convoluted system.
Would have liked suicide mission like mechanics to determine fate of reporters, based on interviews taken and or their dialogue paths (really just to kill allers >:} )

#5
KBABZ

KBABZ
  • Members
  • 93 messages
I find that ME1's leveling system is flawed for one big reason: upgrading something incurs so little bonuses that it doesn't feel like they actually did anything. ME2 went too far the other way by having only four levels instead of 16, and ME3 had a great balance between the two by giving us only 7 levels, and having us choose between two bonuses to keep things interesting.

On items, again I feel like ME3 did it best. Getting a new gun gets highly devalued when you're picking up fifteen of them from every crate and box in the level. It may be realistic for the world, but it doesn't beat the feeling of finding a brand new pistol in the level like what ME3 does. And the modding system for ME3 was fantastic too, again because you could only pick up one of something. In ME1 it just felt like a mass of items and upgrades that you don't want, again because the Inventory system was 'infinite'; there wasn't a finite amount of stuff, it was all randomly given to you. And you'll have to take the ME2/3 Armor pieces and ME3 mod system from my cold, dead hands. Slapping on two invisible mods to your gun just doesn't compare to ammo powers and two visible mods.

For the Mako, I think there's a bigger issue with it that most people don't realize; the levels themselves require too much time to make look good. Even with the constraints of the ME1 engine taken into account, it would have taken far, far too long to bring to the level of the other, more tailored worlds. The best looking one is Virmire, of course, and it was put to good use with Therum and Noveria, but the UNC worlds just look like random maps. There simply isn't the manpower to create all of the objects and effects needed to make those levels look as great as the on-foot levels.

#6
Trank 209

Trank 209
  • Members
  • 21 messages
Im not saying make the huge levels for mako anymore, i mean more focused levels. Also ME1 could have easily had more detail, its Unreal Engine 3. Nothing was stopping them but the time they would have to put into to it, like you said. Thats why they need to make smaller more focused worlds. Or just have 1 or 2 big open worlds so it would be easier to focus on making it more detailed.

#7
RedCaesar97

RedCaesar97
  • Members
  • 3 848 messages
Great. I had taken the time to craft a response and then my network connection disconnected, causing me to lose my entire reply. Gaaah! Now I have to type everything again.

Anyway, I just want to disagree and say I thought ME2 was light-years better than ME1. I played the crap out of ME1, but ME2 just blew me away. I find it so hard to play ME1 now. 

Where do I start? (Note the following is all in my opinion.)

1) Stat-levelling: ME2 was better than ME1 hands-down. 

Power stat bonus increases were tiny -- fractions of a percent or fractions of a second in some cases -- and so were not noticeable, plus 12 points were needed to max out a power. Powers also had Basic-Advanced-Master levels, which were fine but only really necessary so you could decrease your cooldown in most cases.

In ME2, level increases were noticeable and significant, plus the choice of evolutions had the possibility of really making your build unique. Most of the evolutions were not that good, but it was a start of a really good idea. 10 points were needed to max out a power, only 2 less than powers in ME1.



2) Inventory (Weapons, armor, mods, and tools/amps)

Let's face it, ME1 had a three-tier system when it came to inventory: (1) Crap, (2) Soon to be crap, (3) Top of the line. By the end, it did not matter how many weapons, armor, mods, and inventory was programmed into the game, all Shepards ended up with Colossus armor, Medical Exoskeleton armor mods, Spectre weapons, and Serrice Council tools/amps. Only the weapon mods were diverse enough to be considered a choice, but even then there was a lot of filler.

In ME2, you had a diverse weapon set, and researching a weapon damage upgrade applied to all weapons in that category; no more levelling weapons separately. Plus weapon effectiveness no longer relied on a weapon skill power, so weapons were made useful from the start, except the Avenger which has been terrible in all three games.


3) Passive talents.

I think this was also done better in ME2. Sure, in ME1 you had a choice of class specializations, but at least half of the time the specialization was obvious. ME1 also had the Spectre training, but the stat bonuses were incredibly tiny and insignificant. Most players on these forums just stick 4 points into it for Basic Unity, 4 points which tend to be wasted by the end of the game once you are so overpowered.

And I hate how conversation skills (Charm/Intimidate) are their own separate trees. It sucks having to dump points into them instead of putting them into the combat talents were they should belong. I could play the same character 3 times to get all bonuses in either Charm/Intimidate for free, but that becomes too much of a time sink.

ME2 just distilled everything into one passive tree which is just fine by me. I would not mind having one passive tree with an evolution choice for 1 of two additional passive trees, but that is for another discussion.


4) Crouching: crouching was needed in ME1 to increase the stability and accuracy of weapons. This is not needed in ME2 and so crouching is not needed. Crouching would just get you killed in ME2 anyway.


As for ME3, I have a lot of issues with the general gameplay mechanics:
 - weapon leveling system was too much like ME1, and worse since you had to buy your weapon upgrades and you could only level them up to V on a first playthrough
 - too many unbalanced weapons in ME3; too much crap and too much overpowered especially with DLC
 - multiple evolutions per power was interesting, but effectively made pointless with the combo system which relied on the rank of power
 - too many weapons, too many weapons acquired too late in the game
 - shieldgate mechanic rendered some of high-damage the single-shot sniper rifles useless
 - ME3 had a half-assed version of ME2's protection mechanics. Only a few weapons had bonuses to defenses.Too few enemies had protections and they were mostly shields. Not enough barriers and armor was now a superkind of health for super elite enemies.
 - combo system homogenized gameplay
 - ME3 class structure resembles ME1 where the hybrids can outperform the other classes
 - weapon weight system + power cooldown formulas just a bad mechanic

Who would have thought the ME3 multiplayer, which a lot of people thought would sucl, would turn out to be the best part of ME3?

Don't get me wrong, I think ME3 is a great game, but I think they ditched too much of what ME2 special and tried to add in some more "RPG mechanics" which actually hurt the gameplay.

#8
cap and gown

cap and gown
  • Members
  • 4 811 messages
Red, I am kind of surprised to find you say it hard to play ME1. I agree, but I thought you liked it more than you obviously do in comparison to ME2.

I agree with all your ME1 vs ME2 comparisons.

I somewhat disagree with some of your points about ME3. Most especially, the weight system. I think it was rather dumb that only the Soldier could use an assault rifle, the most bog standard weapon in anyone's army. Too much carry over from fantasy type RPGs. I like that any class can use any weapon. That said, I think that some classes that are power classes should be penalized for carrying either too many, or inappropriate weapons. The weight system does this through a penalty to cool downs. Do you think ME should go back to class restricted weapons? (I would hate that.) Or do you have some other idea about a trade off between class type and weapon choice?

Modifié par cap and gown, 07 janvier 2014 - 03:10 .


#9
KBABZ

KBABZ
  • Members
  • 93 messages
ME1 isn't hard to play, but some aspects like the huge loss of aim when firing and having to crouch to get behind low cover takes some getting used to.

#10
RedCaesar97

RedCaesar97
  • Members
  • 3 848 messages

cap and gown wrote...

Red, I am kind of surprised to find you say it hard to play ME1. I agree, but I thought you liked it more than you obviously do in comparison to ME2.


Let me clarify: By "hard" I do not mean that I find the game difficult. Rather, I find it a bit of slog to go through, knowing that I have to spend several hours playing the game before I can import the character into ME2.

I still like ME1. The game is certainly greater than the sum of its parts,... or it is a great game despite its flaws. It depends on my mood on which description I prefer.



I should also give ME3 credit for something that was flawed in both ME1 and ME2: ME3 now allows you to spend points into whatever powers you want without having to unlock other powers first. That was something that annoyed in me in both ME1 and ME2.

ME3 also removes weapon restrictions, so I can carry the Claymore on an Engineer or Adept. Sweet.

#11
cap and gown

cap and gown
  • Members
  • 4 811 messages

RedCaesar97 wrote...

Let me clarify: By "hard" I do not mean that I find the game difficult. Rather, I find it a bit of slog to go through, knowing that I have to spend several hours playing the game before I can import the character into ME2.


Believe me, I understood exactly what you meant. You are good player and I am sure you don't have any problems beating the game.

#12
Trank 209

Trank 209
  • Members
  • 21 messages
That's another thing, I hated how in ME2 as a soldier i couldn't use the SMGs. That didn't make much sense at all. I am a soldier, i am trained to use every weapon.. or i should be.

#13
KBABZ

KBABZ
  • Members
  • 93 messages
I found it a little silly how Shepard carries enough firepower to wipe out a whole platoon. How could her back take such weight?

#14
cap and gown

cap and gown
  • Members
  • 4 811 messages
Because she's the Shepard, of course!

#15
Trank 209

Trank 209
  • Members
  • 21 messages
"I found it a little silly how Shepard carries enough firepower to wipe out a whole platoon. How could her back take such weight?"

Cause its not a Tom Clancy or Battlefield game. Idk. Same reason a dude in Unreal Tournament 2004 can carry over 10 guns.