12 réponses à ce sujet

[CMdrShep93]

 

I admit that I miss the sniper scopes from Mass Effect 1. What did you think of them? Maybe I liked the ME1 scopes because they had a futuristic feel to them. Do you think the ME1 sniper scopes should return in the next Mass Effect?

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

The best thing about Mass Effect Sniper Rifle Scopes was that they didn't come with a hip-fire penalty if you didn't use it.

[Matthias King]

I may be in the minority, but I think hip-fire penalties in general are absolutely ridiculous and make absolutely zero sense.  Muzzle velocity is muzzle velocity is muzzle velocity, period.

 

And on-topic, yes, ME1 scopes were pretty nice, but I also like some of the ME2 and ME3 scopes as well.  As long as the reticule/crosshairs are clearly visible and make good logical sense.

[snackrat]

I support less accuracy on hip-fire (such as in Borderlands) but damage reduction? Silly.

 

As far as design goes, scopes are scopes. I actually did like some of the unique designs in ME3 (such as Collector snipes, Javelin and raptor) - shame they came with annoying sound effects.

[Han Shot First]

Hip fire should certainly take a large accuracy penalty. But damage should be the same. 

[ImaginaryMatter]

It's hard for me to say. The snipers in that game still make me sway with anger.

[Nitrocuban]

Hip fire should certainly take a large accuracy penalty. But damage should be the same. 

 

No permanent crosshairs for SRs? Would be selfexplaining and still allow lucky headshots up close.

(And a permanent Red Dot Scope mod with some other big disadvantages)

[Matthias King]

Some kind of accuracy penalty I could accept, as long as it made logical sense and wasn't too drastic.  If you're on target, then you're on target, just like muzzle velocity is muzzle velocity.  If the game arbitrarily made you miss even if you were on target, then I would call BS on that.

 

Something I wish they would implement on all weapons with a scope equipped, regardless of weapon type, is being able to click in and out of scoped view.  There are plenty of games that do it.  Just click the right thumb stick while zoomed in to enter scope view like just about every other game out there.  They didn't really doing anything with the thumb sticks in ME3 anyway.

 

And while I'm at it, not to take it too off-topic, but I wish they would bring back crouch and map it to clicking the left thumb stick.  Also, being crouched should give a slight boost to weapon accuracy, tying back into the accuracy penalty discussion.

[Oni Changas]

Hip fire should certainly take a large accuracy penalty. But damage should be the same.

Yeah just like the PS2 Socom games. That series was SO ahead of the curve its crazy.

[Vazgen]

I quite enjoyed ME3 scopes. Though having additional "classic" scope wouldn't hurt

[Matthias King]

I think one problem is that they start going overboard with the 'design' aspect and you lose some of the real-world utility and practicality of what a scope is actually supposed to be and the function it's supposed to serve.  Sometimes you look through a scope and it's poorly designed from a practical standpoint and you think, "a real soldier, today or in the future, would never use this and it never would have made it past prototype testing, much less into production."

 

Sometimes the designers need to reign it in a little bit.

[CptFalconPunch]

Verisimility.

 

I'm afraid they might completely ditch that for ME4. Over time, the artists go crazy,

[Matthias King]

Verisimility.

 

I'm afraid they might completely ditch that for ME4. Over time, the artists go crazy,

 

I believe the word you're looking for is actually verisimilitude.  And yes, I think you're right.  In fact, they started ditching it slowly but surely after ME1.

 

Here's an example.  It's something very small and might seem like a nitpick, but I think it says something about the overall shift in their mentality.  I can't cite the source because I honestly don't remember when or where I read it, but someone may be able to source it for me.  There was an interview done by a Bioware developer in which he stated that on ME1, they went to great pains to make sure that the weapons collapsed in a realistic way and that they weren't cheating the rules of the space, in other words, no parts were disappearing or shrinking or clipping for the sake of making it collapse/uncollapse.  Then, he went on to state that after ME2, they quit caring about that and just make weapons that looked cool when uncollapsed and just fudged their collapsed state.

 

Like I said, that may seem like a small thing to point out, but it's symptomatic of their mentality going forward.  Realism, or at least the genuine attempt at it, took a backseat more and more as the series went on, ultimately resulting in Synthesis; the biggest pile of laughable garbage I've ever seen come from the genre of sci-fi.  To even call it pseudo-science is paying it a monumentally huge compliment it doesn't deserve.

 

But I digress.  The point is, everything from the appearance and functionality of weapon scopes to everything else, Bioware has abandoned all pretense of realism at this point.  Some people don't care if things are realistic or not, and that's fine for them.  It's just a shame that a series that started out as reasonably hard science fiction devolved as it has.  That attention to detail and verisimilitude was one of the things I liked most about the series.