1638 réponses à ce sujet

[Mcfly616]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...
I'm still not sure what they did with all the time and resources they were using on ME2. Between what they removed from the experience and what they added.....it's not balanced at all. They've removed much more than they've ever added.

Playtimes have increased or stayed the same as the series progressed. So where'd those hours go if they added "nothing"?

planet scanning, more hallways....Yay


But in terms of exploration, inventory and powers....nothing was added. It was all taken away/butchered/dumbed down. Ofcourse, this was already discussed before the post you quoted. (hence the final line: "they've removed much more than they've ever added")

ME1 didn't have exploration, you had a map which gave you the location of everything you needed, reducing the "exploration" sections to nothing more than driving around on boring landscapes; it was basically a hallway only you got to choose if artifacts ABC were collected in order BCA, which is hardly exploration, just on e large open hallway.

you know, you're right.....but "exploration" is so much easier than saying "I want ME1's freedom to go in any direction I want and approach any combat situation in any way I deem appropriate"


And uhh FYI, not everything was marked on your map for you to go find in any order you decide. Certain objects you actually have to look for, and only appear on the map when you're in close proximity. (i.e. exploration). But no, it isn't one open hallway. In a hallway, you can only go straight or back. (this was not the case in ME1....well, atleast not on every single mission. Unlike ME2)

[ImaginaryMatter]

Mcfly616 wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...
 planet scanning

Planet scanning doesn't account for nearly all of that time.

more hallways....Yay

Where do those hallways take place? Story or character driven missions you say, something ME1 lacks in comparison?

But in terms of exploration, inventory and powers....nothing was added. It was all taken away/butchered/dumbed down. Ofcourse, this was already discussed before the post you quoted.

Do you know what butchers do? They take a mess of an animal and make nice hunks of delicious meat for you to take with you. That is ultimately what the inventory, weapon, and power systems become. Refined from a mess of fat and skin with meat hidden somewhere inside. ME1 is very rough and has the seeds of some good ideas, but had they kept them the same the entire series these
aspects woulbe
failures.

Eh you want to take every word I say and twist it in whatever way suits your argument, be my guest. Though, it's not gonna get you anywhere. If you took the time to read, I've already addressed half the things you brought up.

The time Planet Scanning takes is completely subjective. However, the fact that it takes the place of ME1's 'uncharted worlds' is not debatable. Planet Scanning replaced ME1's exploration.


Idc what a professional butcher does. I know what the term "butchered" means. Seeing as that's exactly what I said, and that I didn't bring up a butcher at all....seems you're confused. I do know that when a Crime Scene Investigator says that the young lady was "butchered" beyond all recognition, that obviously means she's much less than she once was. When a coach says his team got butchered, I know that means they got ran out of the building.

Sorry but ME2 didn't give me all the nice little trimmed pieces of meat. No, it threw the meat in the trash and left it there. There is no inventory. There is no exploration. And powers....well they certainly "trimmed" it.....but not for the better.


Where were the hallways? Every mission. Every single mission in ME2 you are walking down a linear path. Whether it be a man made hallway, or outside. You have no where to go but straight on any given mission.

Which can be said for ME1. None of the games had exploration. There wasn't anything that could be gained by venturing off the beaten path. ME1 had exploration in the most superficial sense of the word, you were outside, which isn't exactly exciting.

[Mcfly616]

StreetMagic wrote...

As much as I want to defend ME1's exploration, the actual missions sucked. It needed to be improved. But I like the general idea of going on to planets.

the actual missions weren't any worse than ME2's. Hell, atleast they started out with a premise....and then we would set out on the mission AFTER having some sort of background story (however bland or undeveloped, it was there nonetheless)


That was one of the things I liked about side-missions in ME1. In ME2 you'd just 'find an anomaly' while scanning, land on the planet, kill some things and hack a computer.....no reason. No information. Just, 'hey this alliance ship has been missing for a year, run down the only paths we've made it possible to walk down, they'll conveniently lead you to the ship computer where you'll press A to download the files and the mission will end (cue Mission Summary screen....another lame ass addition to the franchise)

[ImaginaryMatter]

Mcfly616 wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

As much as I want to defend ME1's exploration, the actual missions sucked. It needed to be improved. But I like the general idea of going on to planets.

the actual missions weren't any worse than ME2's. Hell, atleast they started out with a premise....and then we would set out on the mission AFTER having some sort of background story (however bland or undeveloped, it was there nonetheless)


That was one of the things I liked about side-missions in ME1. In ME2 you'd just 'find an anomaly' while scanning, land on the planet, kill some things and hack a computer.....no reason. No information. Just, 'hey this alliance ship has been missing for a year, run down the only paths we've made it possible to walk down, they'll conveniently lead you to the ship computer where you'll press A to download the files and the mission will end (cue Mission Summary screen....another lame ass addition to the franchise)

Same with ME1, some one (usually Hackett asked Shepard to do something). At least ME2 occationally had the decency to add some intersting combat mechanics, rather than drive to locatation A on some map.

[Mcfly616]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Which can be said for ME1. None of the games had exploration. There wasn't anything that could be gained by venturing off the beaten path. ME1 had exploration in the most superficial sense of the word, you were outside, which isn't exactly exciting.

call it what you want. There's no denying the fact that dropping the player into an open area and allowing them to roam in any direction they want, is completely different than confining them to a set path starting at point A and leading them right to point B.

There's a difference between taking the time to drive over that mountain to that research outpost and finding a cool new omnitool, and just having all your gear and loot littered like neat bread crumbs there along your predetermined path.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Mcfly616 wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Which can be said for ME1. None of the games had exploration. There wasn't anything that could be gained by venturing off the beaten path. ME1 had exploration in the most superficial sense of the word, you were outside, which isn't exactly exciting.

call it what you want. There's no denying the fact that dropping the player into an open area and allowing them to roam in any direction they want, is completely different than confining them to a set path starting at point A and leading them right to point B.

There's a difference between taking the time to drive over that mountain to that research outpost and finding a cool new omnitool, and just having all your gear and loot littered like neat bread crumbs there along your predetermined path.

Yes, there is a difference, one takes more time and is generally more boring. I'm not opposed to the idea of actually exploring alien planets, but ME1 is not the way to go about it. The next game should add actually exploration and reward the player for investigating the terrain of a planet; rather than drive between two objects marked on the map. The thing is ME1 isn't exploration, it's basically a giant hallway located outside. While the skyboxes may be pretty, they don't add anything else. Again I would like the games to included some meaningfull explanation of exploration, none of the games however fit that bill.

Edit: ME1 isn't open, it's basically one large open hallway driving from point A to point B in the Mako. I'm not happy with ME2's replacement but at least it takes less time.

Modifié par ImaginaryMatter, 16 février 2014 - 06:40 .

[Mcfly616]

StreetMagic wrote...



I think ME2's had a handcrafted quality to them. They are all different from each other, as far as atmosphere goes. Sure, there could be more gameplay variety, but I think there was more attention given to how they looked and what they invoked. One mission is Blood Pack Communication Relay.. it's the green fog planet fighting off those bug things. Then another is that crashed ship on the cliff. Then there's the standard merc missions. Or stopping batarian terrorists. Or rescue a quarian explorer. Or whatever. They added more spice than ME1's. They felt like different places.

that's my point. The backgrounds looked different. And that's it. There was no story or dialogue behind any of them. It was just: 'there's some mercs/base/distress signal, land kill a few things, push a button in a computer....mission over'


And no, that isnt how it was in ME1. ME1's side missions actually had some context. While the maps and enemy outposts were nauseatingly rehashed, they all had a story. There was no story to ME2's missions. Just 'Blue Suns base down there, investigate and find out what happened to Cerberus agent'....but guess what, we never find out in-game as we would in ME1. No, we get a mission summary, and hey I picked up 500 iridium.


I'll take actual story variation over environmental variation any day. Horde mode is horde mode no matter what the background is.

[Mcfly616]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Which can be said for ME1. None of the games had exploration. There wasn't anything that could be gained by venturing off the beaten path. ME1 had exploration in the most superficial sense of the word, you were outside, which isn't exactly exciting.

call it what you want. There's no denying the fact that dropping the player into an open area and allowing them to roam in any direction they want, is completely different than confining them to a set path starting at point A and leading them right to point B.

There's a difference between taking the time to drive over that mountain to that research outpost and finding a cool new omnitool, and just having all your gear and loot littered like neat bread crumbs there along your predetermined path.

 

Yes, there is a difference, one takes more time and is generally more boring. I'm not opposed to the idea of actually exploring alien planets, but ME1 is not the way to go about it. The next game should add actually exploration and reward the player for investigating the terrain of a planet; rather than drive between two objects marked on the map. The thing is ME1 isn't exploration, it's basically a giant hallway located outside. While the skyboxes may be pretty, they don't add anything else. Again I would like the games to included some meaningfull explanation of exploration, none of the games however fit that bill.

Edit: ME1 isn't open, it's basically one large open hallway driving from point A to point B in the Mako. I'm not happy with ME2's replacement but at least it takes less time.

I never once said that I wanted exactly what ME1 offered. I simply implied that they should refine it and that what they replaced it with in ME2 was much worse.


And we're just gonna have to agree to disagree. You're never going to convince me that ME1s uncharted worlds were hallways/corridors. Because they're not. They don't force me to run straight to point B. ME1 is open. It's just not an "open-world" game.

No, it's not driving from Point A to Point B in the Mako.....seeing as how you can drive in any direction you want, (unlike in ME2) we aren't forced into going straight to Point B. We can take whatever path we like to it. And hey, you can go to point B as fast as you want in ME1 if that's what you wanna do. And for us that like to take our time and look around, we had that option. Whereas in ME2 everybody/all of us are literally forced (meaning we have no choice) to go straight forward until we reach the end.

Modifié par Mcfly616, 16 février 2014 - 07:02 .

[Mcfly616]

With the way the sequels handled loot and gear.....they shouldve just given it to us from the moment we started the game. I mean, if they're just going to lay the loot at our feet in the middle of the only path we can walk down...making it literally impossible to miss.....why not just give that **** to us right out of the gate?

Why not? They're basically handing it to us anyway. We're not working/looking for it. They throw it right in our face so that we don't have to.

[grey_wind]

StreetMagic wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Which
can be said for ME1. None of the games had exploration. There wasn't
anything that could be gained by venturing off the beaten path. ME1 had
exploration in the most superficial sense of the word, you were outside,
which isn't exactly exciting.

call it what you want.
There's no denying the fact that dropping the player into an open area
and allowing them to roam in any direction they want, is completely
different than confining them to a set path starting at point A and
leading them right to point B.

There's a difference between
taking the time to drive over that mountain to that research outpost and
finding a cool new omnitool, and just having all your gear and loot
littered like neat bread crumbs there along your predetermined path.

Yes,
there is a difference, one takes more time and is generally more
boring. I'm not opposed to the idea of actually exploring alien planets,
but ME1 is not the way to go about it. The next game should add
actually exploration and reward the player for investigating the terrain
of a planet; rather than drive between two objects marked on the map.
The thing is ME1 isn't exploration, it's basically a giant hallway
located outside. While the skyboxes may be pretty, they don't add
anything else. Again I would like the games to included some meaningfull
explanation of exploration, none of the games however fit that bill.

Edit:
ME1 isn't open, it's basically one large open hallway driving from
point A to point B in the Mako. I'm not happy with ME2's replacement but
at least it takes less time.

Exploration is in the characters. Like I said earlier. That's been their strong suit. Psychological exploration, if you will.

Although now they could add shooter combat as one of their strong suits. I don't think they need to improve it much. Tweak, yes. Not reinvent the wheel though.

The ME series made me lose some confidence in how they handle "characters". It feels like BioWare can write really well but for only one game. They simply don't know how to carry over any meaningful character development into the succeeding games.
Most of the characters lost a lot of their nuance as we went from one game to the next, and many of them were shoehorned into certain archetypes even when it didn't really fit them.

So a part of me kinda hopes that the characters they write for the next game are only confined to that one game.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Mcfly616 wrote...

No, it's not driving from Point A to Point B in the Mako.....seeing as how you can drive in any direction you want, (unlike in ME2) we aren't forced into going to Point B. We can take whatever path we like to it. And hey, you can go to point B as fast as you want in ME1 if that's what you wanna do. And for us that like to take our time and look around, we had that option. Whereas in ME2 everybody/all of us are literally forced (meaning we have no choice) to go straight forward until we reach the end.

That's what I mean. You gain nothing in ME1 from looking around, it's just elevated dirt, you can easilt run around looking at the more defined environment in the ME2 side missions. Yes, you can drive around in any direction you want in ME1 (within a certain defined box) but the same can be said for ME2 (onlyyou run), the point is the player doesn't gain anything from it.

I'm just trying to say if they do add "exploration" it shouldn't be similar to any of the previous games. It should be something completely new and completely different. Because the previouse games were either tedious or boring.

Modifié par ImaginaryMatter, 16 février 2014 - 07:07 .

[Mcfly616]

I don't really care on what a game emphasizes. The Elder Scrolls doesn't emphasize loot, but its there and it's an element of the game that many people like. But it's not one of the main emphasis' of the game.


GTA V doesn't emphasize vehicle customization as central to the experience....but it'd be a lesser experience without it.


Call me crazy, but I actually like finding some Krogan Rage armor on the some backwater world, rather than picking up some Serrice Council grieves sitting in front of the one door I can possibly walk through.


You'd argue: "but I don't want to travel to some backwater planet just to get some armor, I'd rather walk straight and just run into it because it's quicker."

And that's when it's obvious we're just different types of gamers.I like my RPGs to be immersive role-playing experiences, and I like my shooters to be 'splosion-fests. I don't like when my RPGs start trying to be something they're not. Others would prefer Mass Effect become a full blown shooter.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Mcfly616 wrote...

You'd argue: "but I don't want to travel to some backwater planet just to get some armor, I'd rather walk straight and just run into it because it's quicker."

And that's when it's obvious we're just different types of gamers.I like my RPGs to be immersive role-playing experiences, and I like my shooters to be 'splosion-fests. I don't like when my RPGs start trying to be something they're not. Others would prefer Mass Effect become a full blown shooter.

I don't find it immersive along with a few other people (how can someone carry 74 Assault rifles?). Just boring. I really dislike the genre "RPG" because now it seems like just adding a bunch of collecting and selling of randon items just for the sake of collecting and selling a bunch of random items. It's time consuming and just makes parts of the game seem like a chore. If I wanted to manage a vast amount of inventory I would join the Navy's Supply Corp.

[Mcfly616]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

No, it's not driving from Point A to Point B in the Mako.....seeing as how you can drive in any direction you want, (unlike in ME2) we aren't forced into going to Point B. We can take whatever path we like to it. And hey, you can go to point B as fast as you want in ME1 if that's what you wanna do. And for us that like to take our time and look around, we had that option. Whereas in ME2 everybody/all of us are literally forced (meaning we have no choice) to go straight forward until we reach the end.

That's what I mean. You gain nothing in ME1 from looking around, it's just elevated dirt, you can easilt run around looking at the more defined environment in the ME2 side missions. Yes, you can drive around in any direction you want in ME1 (within a certain defined box) but the same can be said for ME2 (onlyyou run), the point is the player doesn't gain anything from it.

I'm just trying to say if they do add "exploration" it shouldn't be similar to any of the previous games. It should be something completely new and completely different. Because the previouse games were either tedious or boring.

here, how about I just drop the word "exploration" and start using the words "open" and "freedom" ......because those two things, ME2 doesn't have.


ME1 may have been a defined box. But ME2s didn't even compare to that. They were corridors. Whether man-made structures, or outdoor paths, they all had a beginning and an end due to the fact that they were defined paths. They were sidewalks with little wiggle room and no where to go but straight or back. ME1s were parking lots. And I could go anywhere in that parking lot.

Screw loot and exploration, I look at it from a combat standpoint more than anything. In ME1 I could approach nearly any confrontation from whatever angle I wanted. Roll up with the Mako, move up and take cover, or snipe them from a mile high mountain so I can just waltz right in the front door whistling dixie....


The sequels offer no such freedom. They put us on our sidewalk, put the enemies in front of us, and conveniently place all the little boxes and barriers inbetween us and them. Every mission is a straight up firefight. That type of monotony does a good job breaking ones immersion.

[Mcfly616]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

You'd argue: "but I don't want to travel to some backwater planet just to get some armor, I'd rather walk straight and just run into it because it's quicker."

And that's when it's obvious we're just different types of gamers.I like my RPGs to be immersive role-playing experiences, and I like my shooters to be 'splosion-fests. I don't like when my RPGs start trying to be something they're not. Others would prefer Mass Effect become a full blown shooter.

I don't find it immersive along with a few other people (how can someone carry 74 Assault rifles?). Just boring. I really dislike the genre "RPG" because now it seems like just adding a bunch of collecting and selling of randon items just for the sake of collecting and selling a bunch of random items. It's time consuming and just makes parts of the game seem like a chore. If I wanted to manage a vast amount of inventory I would join the Navy's Supply Corp.

 not sure who said RPG consists of loot and random items just for the sake of it....Borderlands was all about that, and I wouldn't consider it an RPG.


However you're aware of the fact that you don't have to pick up the loot. That sorta thing is optional. Nobody's forcing you. Which furthers my point about ME2. In ME1 you had a lot of freedom and choice concerning nearly every aspect of the gameplay. In ME2, such freedoms are greatly reduced if not completely removed. I never said ME1s inventory was perfect or even good.....however, I am saying that it's much better than the nonexistent inventory in ME2. 


Somethings better than nothing. Especially when something is completely optional. You can still have nothing if you want. But for those of us that like 'something', we should have that option.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Mcfly616 wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

No, it's not driving from Point A to Point B in the Mako.....seeing as how you can drive in any direction you want, (unlike in ME2) we aren't forced into going to Point B. We can take whatever path we like to it. And hey, you can go to point B as fast as you want in ME1 if that's what you wanna do. And for us that like to take our time and look around, we had that option. Whereas in ME2 everybody/all of us are literally forced (meaning we have no choice) to go straight forward until we reach the end.

That's what I mean. You gain nothing in ME1 from looking around, it's just elevated dirt, you can easilt run around looking at the more defined environment in the ME2 side missions. Yes, you can drive around in any direction you want in ME1 (within a certain defined box) but the same can be said for ME2 (onlyyou run), the point is the player doesn't gain anything from it.

I'm just trying to say if they do add "exploration" it shouldn't be similar to any of the previous games. It should be something completely new and completely different. Because the previouse games were either tedious or boring.

here, how about I just drop the word "exploration" and start using the words "open" and "freedom" ......because those two things, ME2 doesn't have.


ME1 may have been a defined box. But ME2s didn't even compare to that. They were corridors. Whether man-made structures, or outdoor paths, they all had a beginning and an end due to the fact that they were defined paths. They were sidewalks with little wiggle room and no where to go but straight or back. ME1s were parking lots. And I could go anywhere in that parking lot.

Screw loot and exploration, I look at it from a combat standpoint more than anything. In ME1 I could approach nearly any confrontation from whatever angle I wanted. Roll up with the Mako, move up and take cover, or snipe them from a mile high mountain so I can just waltz right in the front door whistling dixie....


The sequels offer no such freedom. They put us on our sidewalk, put the enemies in front of us, and conveniently place all the little boxes and barriers inbetween us and them. Every mission is a straight up firefight. That type of monotony does a good job breaking ones immersion.

I see ME1 as predifined corridors. No matter what you do some predefined enemy is going to be waiting for all eternity at some predefined spot conveniantly marked on the map, there's no way to avoid it. The only variance relies on the player's tactical approach to a situation which is basically the same for each game. I don't find going off the "sidewalk" meaningful if there's nothing to be gained by going off the sidewalk.

The one thing I liked about ME2 is that it offered some variance in terms of gameplay, like, some planet had a fog of war or a different enemy compostion or a time limit, at least something. ME1 is the same thing  for each and every planet, I'm glad Joker landed me next to the same Immunity spamming Organics as every other mission. As I said before ME1's side mission are a giant sidewalk, everything is predetermined and marked for the players convenience on a map. The benefit to ME2 and ME3 is that they drop all pretence of "exploration" instead of driving in the Mako for a few minutes to obtain the same result.

[Mcfly616]

By your definition GTA is a predefined corridor too....because it has borders and there's things waiting at certain locations for the player to come across.


ME2 offered some variance in terms of gameplay, and as evidence you list the environment and atmosphere? Sorry, but all of ME2's gameplay was "straight forward" regardless of what class you play as. You are going straight at your enemy. A static background is a static background, it is not "gameplay"



Idc if you dont like what you find "off the sidewalk", atleast you have the option to go off the sidewalk or not. You're free to stay on it if you like. In ME2, I have no such liberty. I'm forced to walk on the sidewalk. There's nothing but the sidewalk. There's the sidewalk and walls on each side herding us like cattle. Not the case in ME1. Good luck with sniping from a mountain on your ME2 sidewalk. (oops, such awesomeness isn't even possible in ME2)



What'd you think I was talking about? I literally listed tactical/combat approach as my main reason for wanting more "open" gameplay. Bottom line: ME1 offers more freedom/variety in approaching combat situations than both sequels combined.


Next you're gonna say that a cow grazing the open range is the same thing as the cow being led down the path to the slaughter house.

Modifié par Mcfly616, 16 février 2014 - 08:03 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

Mcfly616 wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

I don't find it immersive along with a few other people (how can someone carry 74 Assault rifles?). Just boring. I really dislike the genre "RPG" because now it seems like just adding a bunch of collecting and selling of randon items just for the sake of collecting and selling a bunch of random items. It's time consuming and just makes parts of the game seem like a chore. If I wanted to manage a vast amount of inventory I would join the Navy's Supply Corp.

 not sure who said RPG consists of loot and random items just for the sake of it....Borderlands was all about that, and I wouldn't consider it an RPG.


However you're aware of the fact that you don't have to pick up the loot. That sorta thing is optional. Nobody's forcing you. Which furthers my point about ME2. In ME1 you had a lot of freedom and choice concerning nearly every aspect of the gameplay. In ME2, such freedoms are greatly reduced if not completely removed. I never said ME1s inventory was perfect or even good.....however, I am saying that it's much better than the nonexistent inventory in ME2. 


Somethings better than nothing. Especially when something is completely optional. You can still have nothing if you want. But for those of us that like 'something', we should have that option.

I find ME2's and ME3's inventory superior as there is actually a choice to be had between different weapons (no matter how small it may be in ME2). ME1 offers nothing but the same weapons for each category with nothing to differentiate them except for DPS. I said elsewhere that for ME2 even the Tempest vs Shuriken debate is deeper than the entirety of ME1's inventory debate as it at least include's the players tactics and gameplay into consideration.