98 réponses à ce sujet

[kraze07]

Braag wrote...

If you seriously think the weapons and overall combat in ME1 was better than ME2 then you're obviously insane...

Call me krazy then. j/k Even though the weapons are better and the combat has been improved, I still like the old system of modding weapons and having to worry about overheating and not looking for heat sinks.  I also find it odd that people are talking about how imbalanced the game would be if they kept the old weapons system with the new style of combat. There's no multiplayer in this game so why are you guys worrying about it being imbalanced.

[Soruyao]

Thermal clips don't have to be magic. They're likely just canisters of some super cooled substance that gets evaporated in order to muffle heat generation so your gun doesn't explode.

[Deflagratio]

kraze07 wrote...

Braag wrote...

If you seriously think the weapons and overall combat in ME1 was better than ME2 then you're obviously insane...

Call me krazy then. j/k Even though the weapons are better and the combat has been improved, I still like the old system of modding weapons and having to worry about overheating and not looking for heat sinks.  I also find it odd that people are talking about how imbalanced the game would be if they kept the old weapons system with the new style of combat. There's no multiplayer in this game so why are you guys worrying about it being imbalanced.

So you support instant-win buttons in games then? Once you remove any skill from playing a game, you may as well be watching a movie that pisses you off, and rewinds occasionally on its own.

Balance adds variety, with different but (more or less) equal ways to reach a certain goal, you're overal enjoyment factor increases.

Balance adds challenge, without the ability simply "Win the game" with no effort, you create a sense of accomplishment, which increases your enjoyment of the game.

I'm going to guess you're a Xenosaga and Metal Gear 4 fan if you don't understand the importance of balance in a game. It's just a visual ride that you occasonally have to hold a hunk of plastic and push a tiny stick forward huh?

I do think removing the weapon mod system was stupid, given how talented Bioware is, they could have found some way to make it work and preserve balance. Considering they stuffed 2 DVD's worth of stuff into the game, and apparently had to compress some of it so much that sound cuts out occasionally and cutscenes break in and out, I can only guess what was cut just in order to make something fit.

[Deflagratio]

Soruyao wrote...

Thermal clips don't have to be magic. They're likely just canisters of some super cooled substance that gets evaporated in order to muffle heat generation so your gun doesn't explode.

I always told myself that the lithium used is being flash-boiled and then refreezeing comprimising the integrity of the sink, and thus severely limiting it's ability to effectively dissapate heat and ensuring they have a [very] limited life span. If you've ever worked with PC heat management components, you know that shape is actually quite important.


Hell, I even considered that there was a new breed of scavengers that wait til after large conflicts like gang-wars (Especially on Omega) and scavenge the old sinks to be recycled.  But maybe I'm just in the deep stages of denial.

Modifié par Deflagratio, 16 février 2010 - 11:55 .

[ShepMania]

No need to give allowances to Bioware for "thermal clip efficiency compromises" when refreezing etc etc.. these guns need to work without air to cool them! ie out of space, low pressure planets etc.

The guns of ME1 required voodoo magic to work in those circumstances, in ME2 they work on physics. I prefer the new system on those grounds...

Modifié par ShepMania, 16 février 2010 - 12:00 .

[Fluffeh Kitteh]

They work on physics? shouldn't it be "thermodynamics"



Argh what the heck, it's sci fi, just stick in a few sciency-sounding terminology and the general public will lap it up anyway. Debating on the plausibility of it will simply force you to dig into the level where you start to realise that the whole thing is already within the "scientifically fictional and unrealistic" boundary of sci fi.

[kraze07]

Deflagratio wrote...

kraze07 wrote...

Braag wrote...

If you seriously think the weapons and overall combat in ME1 was better than ME2 then you're obviously insane...

Call me krazy then. j/k Even though the weapons are better and the combat has been improved, I still like the old system of modding weapons and having to worry about overheating and not looking for heat sinks.  I also find it odd that people are talking about how imbalanced the game would be if they kept the old weapons system with the new style of combat. There's no multiplayer in this game so why are you guys worrying about it being imbalanced.

So you support instant-win buttons in games then? Once you remove any skill from playing a game, you may as well be watching a movie that pisses you off, and rewinds occasionally on its own.

Balance adds variety, with different but (more or less) equal ways to reach a certain goal, you're overal enjoyment factor increases.

Balance adds challenge, without the ability simply "Win the game" with no effort, you create a sense of accomplishment, which increases your enjoyment of the game.

I'm going to guess you're a Xenosaga and Metal Gear 4 fan if you don't understand the importance of balance in a game. It's just a visual ride that you occasonally have to hold a hunk of plastic and push a tiny stick forward huh?

I do think removing the weapon mod system was stupid, given how talented Bioware is, they could have found some way to make it work and preserve balance. Considering they stuffed 2 DVD's worth of stuff into the game, and apparently had to compress some of it so much that sound cuts out occasionally and cutscenes break in and out, I can only guess what was cut just in order to make something fit.

Actually I am a big fan of MGS4. I've noticed that  a game can be imbalanced and still be challenging. Just look at games like Street Fighter 4(ken/zangief/ryu have spam moves that are nearly unstoppable), classic Contra(infinte ammo and uber weapon upgrades), and even Dragon Age: Origins (Mages are super powerful compared to warriors). Those games are imbalanced and are still pretty challenging.

[yoomazir]

ShepMania wrote...

No need to give allowances to Bioware for "thermal clip efficiency compromises" when refreezing etc etc.. these guns need to work without air to cool them! ie out of space, low pressure planets etc.

The guns of ME1 required voodoo magic to work in those circumstances, in ME2 they work on physics. I prefer the new system on those grounds...

work on physics..in a futuristic game? with alien races, advanced tehcnology and all the stuff coming with it?
But hey, nice try with the voodoo stuff, just try to lower your ganja consomation.

[Deflagratio]

kraze07 wrote...

Deflagratio wrote...

kraze07 wrote...

Braag wrote...

If you seriously think the weapons and overall combat in ME1 was better than ME2 then you're obviously insane...

Call me krazy then. j/k Even though the weapons are better and the combat has been improved, I still like the old system of modding weapons and having to worry about overheating and not looking for heat sinks.  I also find it odd that people are talking about how imbalanced the game would be if they kept the old weapons system with the new style of combat. There's no multiplayer in this game so why are you guys worrying about it being imbalanced.

So you support instant-win buttons in games then? Once you remove any skill from playing a game, you may as well be watching a movie that pisses you off, and rewinds occasionally on its own.

Balance adds variety, with different but (more or less) equal ways to reach a certain goal, you're overal enjoyment factor increases.

Balance adds challenge, without the ability simply "Win the game" with no effort, you create a sense of accomplishment, which increases your enjoyment of the game.

I'm going to guess you're a Xenosaga and Metal Gear 4 fan if you don't understand the importance of balance in a game. It's just a visual ride that you occasonally have to hold a hunk of plastic and push a tiny stick forward huh?

I do think removing the weapon mod system was stupid, given how talented Bioware is, they could have found some way to make it work and preserve balance. Considering they stuffed 2 DVD's worth of stuff into the game, and apparently had to compress some of it so much that sound cuts out occasionally and cutscenes break in and out, I can only guess what was cut just in order to make something fit.

Actually I am a big fan of MGS4. I've noticed that  a game can be imbalanced and still be challenging. Just look at games like Street Fighter 4(ken/zangief/ryu have spam moves that are nearly unstoppable), classic Contra(infinte ammo and uber weapon upgrades), and even Dragon Age: Origins (Mages are super powerful compared to warriors). Those games are imbalanced and are still pretty challenging.

Yah, if you don't use any of that. Except for classic Contra. The hard part of that game was not falling to your death, and muscle memory, the weapons had nothing to do with the game short of killing bosses.

Dragon Age is not challenging, at least once you learn about the imbalances (1.Make Mage 2.  Use Mage) No fighting game is challenging, since the basis of the game is on the skill of the other player, thus the other play is the challenge, and not the game itself (Unless you're talking about lolCPU player, and then all you need to do is just practice a lil more past the suck curve). But there is a huge difference between a slight imbalance (Counter-able spam moves) and a Gamebreaking fail (Stand 50000000000 miles away, and snipe with unlimited ammo and no threat of retaliation). Mass2 is easy enough with an Infiltrator WITH limited Ammo (Especially after you get that widow, take down a gunship with 2 well placed shots, wtf). If there was Unlimited Ammo in Mass2, the game would LITERALLY BE A WASTE OF SHELF SPACE. Just have someone stream the game over the internet and watch. At least with Ammo, I have to occasionally pull out the Tempest and take down the last 2 enemies in a room with 30.

And remember, a balance issue is only a balance issue if you use it. Dragon Age you can avoid it by not using a mage, SFIV you can avoid it by not using or fighting against those characters(A little harder than the previous) Contra, don't input cheat codes you cheating douche. Mass Effect 2, you kind of Have to use guns.  Or at the very least, you don't have the option to NEVER use a gun, thus that imbalance is forced upon you with no option to circumvent it through "Honor gaming".

[kraze07]

Deflagratio wrote...

kraze07 wrote...

Deflagratio wrote...

kraze07 wrote...

Braag wrote...

If you seriously think the weapons and overall combat in ME1 was better than ME2 then you're obviously insane...

Call me krazy then. j/k Even though the weapons are better and the combat has been improved, I still like the old system of modding weapons and having to worry about overheating and not looking for heat sinks.  I also find it odd that people are talking about how imbalanced the game would be if they kept the old weapons system with the new style of combat. There's no multiplayer in this game so why are you guys worrying about it being imbalanced.

So you support instant-win buttons in games then? Once you remove any skill from playing a game, you may as well be watching a movie that pisses you off, and rewinds occasionally on its own.

Balance adds variety, with different but (more or less) equal ways to reach a certain goal, you're overal enjoyment factor increases.

Balance adds challenge, without the ability simply "Win the game" with no effort, you create a sense of accomplishment, which increases your enjoyment of the game.

I'm going to guess you're a Xenosaga and Metal Gear 4 fan if you don't understand the importance of balance in a game. It's just a visual ride that you occasonally have to hold a hunk of plastic and push a tiny stick forward huh?

I do think removing the weapon mod system was stupid, given how talented Bioware is, they could have found some way to make it work and preserve balance. Considering they stuffed 2 DVD's worth of stuff into the game, and apparently had to compress some of it so much that sound cuts out occasionally and cutscenes break in and out, I can only guess what was cut just in order to make something fit.

Actually I am a big fan of MGS4. I've noticed that  a game can be imbalanced and still be challenging. Just look at games like Street Fighter 4(ken/zangief/ryu have spam moves that are nearly unstoppable), classic Contra(infinte ammo and uber weapon upgrades), and even Dragon Age: Origins (Mages are super powerful compared to warriors). Those games are imbalanced and are still pretty challenging.

Yah, if you don't use any of that. Except for classic Contra. The hard part of that game was not falling to your death, and muscle memory, the weapons had nothing to do with the game short of killing bosses.

Dragon Age is not challenging, at least once you learn about the imbalances (1.Make Mage 2.  Use Mage) No fighting game is challenging, since the basis of the game is on the skill of the other player, thus the other play is the challenge, and not the game itself (Unless you're talking about lolCPU player, and then all you need to do is just practice a lil more past the suck curve). But there is a huge difference between a slight imbalance (Counter-able spam moves) and a Gamebreaking fail (Stand 50000000000 miles away, and snipe with unlimited ammo and no threat of retaliation). Mass2 is easy enough with an Infiltrator WITH limited Ammo (Especially after you get that widow, take down a gunship with 2 well placed shots, wtf). If there was Unlimited Ammo in Mass2, the game would LITERALLY BE A WASTE OF SHELF SPACE. Just have someone stream the game over the internet and watch. At least with Ammo, I have to occasionally pull out the Tempest and take down the last 2 enemies in a room with 30.

And remember, a balance issue is only a balance issue if you use it. Dragon Age you can avoid it by not using a mage, SFIV you can avoid it by not using or fighting against those characters(A little harder than the previous) Contra, don't input cheat codes you cheating douche. Mass Effect 2, you kind of Have to use guns.  Or at the very least, you don't have the option to NEVER use a gun, thus that imbalance is forced upon you with no option to circumvent it through "Honor gaming".

The whole point of sniping is to take the enemy out without having to risk getting shot. If that makes the game too easy then don't use sniper rifles. It's not like you have to use them. In DA:O you don't have to use mages if you don't want to. Just imagine if the heavy weapons in ME2 had infinite ammo. That would make the game ultra imbalanced, but it's a singleplayer game so it wouldn't matter because if you want a challenge all you'd have to do is stop using the heavy weapons. Thermal clips have nothing to do with balancing the game out. All they do is make the game more shooter friendly. Even if we had infinite ammo like in ME1 we'd still have to worry about weapons overheating unless they've been modded.

[LoweGear]

BellaStrega wrote...

The thing that bothers me is that every weapon uses exactly the same ejectable heat sinks, but the amount of shots each weapon can fire before ejecting the heat sink maps uncannily well to how many shots that weapon might have if it used actual bullets. Why does the Carnifex only fire six shots before you have to reload, but the SMG or AR can fire dozens? Does this even make sense?

This is actually extremely simple to rationalize.

Heavy Pistols are small weapons that have limited space for cooling systems inside their frames, and combined with the damage each of their shots do, they heat up faster, hence limiting their shots per thermal clip.

Submachine Guns and Machine pistols deal less damage per single shot than Heavy Pistols, which means they heat up more slowly due to the reduced energy per shot, hence why they can fire lots of rounds.

Assault Rifles are large weapons with lots of space for larger, more efficient heat management systems. Hence they can shoot more on a single thermal clip without sacrificing attack power.

Shotguns and Sniper Rifles are also large weapons, but due to the amount of power needed for each shot (which gives them their incredible damage), they create more heat faster than all other weapon types, hence why they also have limited shots per thermal clip.

Or that while heat sinks are usable in all weapons, each weapon has its own independent ammo reserve. If you run through all available ammo for your sniper rifle, your assault rifle will still be full.

Obvious lore-ignorant gameplay mechanic, otherwise the balance for each weapon (and the reason for using the ammo system in the first place) is lost. It's like asking why Shepard can't simply push things out of his way with biotics to get to an area blocked by crates.

[Darth Drago]

baller7345 wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

JedTed wrote...

Soruyao wrote...

I will agree that having a weapon that never runs out of ammo would be fine, but I would suggest the SMG for this, since that thing has nearly unlimited ammo anyway.   The SMG (and the AR) are weapons I have literally never run out of ammo for.

Yeah but how often do you use the heavy pistol compared to the AR or SMG?  Pistols a grenerally the "fallback" weapons for when you eventually run out of AR ammo you got something to defend yourself.

Once upon a time a pistol was the only weapon you could use for some classes. Now you get to a certain point and suddenly I get to choose a sniper rifle or assault rifle to specialize in, assuming I don’t give the shotgun to Grunt.

In your second and every subsequent playthough you had the ability of giving any class any other weapon you wanted.  Alternatively you could just use the Geth Pulse Rifle X for its high accuracy even if you didn't have training in it.

-A base Shepard Adept in ME1 only had pistol and the grenades to use.

-A base Shepard Adept in ME2 gets pistols, submachine guns, a choice of a sniper rifle or assault rifle in the form of advanced training (just by picking up the gun no less) and a choice of 6 heavy weapons. Why use your powers now since you practically in the Soldier class now.

Sure you’ll say but you can use that Geth Pulse Rifle or any other weapon you can pick up in ME1 or bring up the fact that you can choose to add a weapon or power you unlocked in a previous game to add to your ME1 Shepard but the fact is still there this game is catered almost exclusively to the shooting genre gamer.

[baller7345]

Darth Drago wrote...

baller7345 wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

JedTed wrote...

Soruyao wrote...

I will agree that having a weapon that never runs out of ammo would be fine, but I would suggest the SMG for this, since that thing has nearly unlimited ammo anyway.   The SMG (and the AR) are weapons I have literally never run out of ammo for.

Yeah but how often do you use the heavy pistol compared to the AR or SMG?  Pistols a grenerally the "fallback" weapons for when you eventually run out of AR ammo you got something to defend yourself.

Once upon a time a pistol was the only weapon you could use for some classes. Now you get to a certain point and suddenly I get to choose a sniper rifle or assault rifle to specialize in, assuming I don’t give the shotgun to Grunt.

In your second and every subsequent playthough you had the ability of giving any class any other weapon you wanted.  Alternatively you could just use the Geth Pulse Rifle X for its high accuracy even if you didn't have training in it.

-A base Shepard Adept in ME1 only had pistol and the grenades to use.

-A base Shepard Adept in ME2 gets pistols, submachine guns, a choice of a sniper rifle or assault rifle in the form of advanced training (just by picking up the gun no less) and a choice of 6 heavy weapons. Why use your powers now since you practically in the Soldier class now.

Sure you’ll say but you can use that Geth Pulse Rifle or any other weapon you can pick up in ME1 or bring up the fact that you can choose to add a weapon or power you unlocked in a previous game to add to your ME1 Shepard but the fact is still there this game is catered almost exclusively to the shooting genre gamer.

I agree with that on the combat classes (inflitrator/soldier/vanguard) but when I played an engineer and when my roommate played an adept we both found ourselves shooting far less than the first game.  They did make the shooting more accessible but by taking away marksman from the power based classes they managed to make your powers more effective than simply firing your rapid fire pistol of death.

[mudjmc]

I don't understand why they just don't use both games' mechanics, and have "Normal" weapons that recharge or overheat, and then have "Heavy" or "Special" weapons that consume ammo.

This would have actually made sense and provided a perfect reason for why the more powerful weapons use ammo and the normal stuff doesn't.

It's not like ammo is that scarce, so why is it not just rechargable? Or at least a combination?

[CatatonicMan]

I think the idea behind the thermal clips wasn't bad, really; but the way they implemented them in game has got to be one of the stupidest things I've seen in all my years impersonating a sportscaster.



Firstly, the thermal clips are supposed to be universal, yet for some reason you don't have a universal pool of thermal clips. Instead, each time you get ammo it gets distributed among all your weapons, a design which is obviously there to 'encourage' using multiple weapons instead of a single best weapon.



Secondly, the thermal clips never cool down either inside nor outside the weapon. If the system was in any way derived from the one implemented in ME1, the thermal clips would regenerate, albeit slowly; they should be an unlimited resource long term. Maybe picking up clips in battle is reasonable, but when not in battle ammo should be restored fully. You should also be able to use the weapons without ammo in a limited fashion (like ME1).



Thirdly, regardless of what method they used for ammo, they should have left in weapon customization. This should have been a no-brainer, and it would have helped make the limited weapon selection feel more personal.



There, my thoughts on the matter. Feel free to agree/disagree/qualify/ignore me at your pleasure.

[Nazo]

ME1's system created no tension, just 'hide and wait for the beeping to stop'. ME2's system, in addition to having cooler-looking animations, creates an 'oh man I am out of sniper/pistol/whatever ammo/heat and I would like to use it, need to make do or stun them and scramble for some other position where I see heat packs or...'



See the difference? ME2 encourages choices, movement and action. It also, for better or worse, makes the game seem more like a standard shooter. C'est la vie.

[CatatonicMan]

Nazo wrote...

ME1's system created no tension, just 'hide and wait for the beeping to stop'. ME2's system, in addition to having cooler-looking animations, creates an 'oh man I am out of sniper/pistol/whatever ammo/heat and I would like to use it, need to make do or stun them and scramble for some other position where I see heat packs or...'

See the difference? ME2 encourages choices, movement and action. It also, for better or worse, makes the game seem more like a standard shooter. C'est la vie.

Actually, I found ME2 to basically consist of 'look, shoot, then hide and wait for the beeping to stop'. You just did it more frequently in ME2 than ME1.

No real tension there, either; the fights were either stupidly easy (you will almost certainly live) or frustratingly hard (you will almost certainly die).

I think both games were equal on the choice frontier; each had more/less choices in different areas than the other.

Modifié par CatatonicMan, 20 février 2010 - 06:17 .

[LoweGear]

CatatonicMan wrote...
Actually, I found ME2 to basically consist of 'look, shoot, then hide and wait for the beeping to stop'. You just did it more frequently in ME2 than ME1.

What beeping in ME2 may I ask?

Modifié par LoweGear, 20 février 2010 - 06:56 .

[Seanylegit]

IMO I prefer the new system.

[BoozeZombie]

I think they should've partially kept the old system, allowing you to fire one magazine of ammo out of your gun after you've used your heatsink, then your gun would lock up and you'd need to load up a new sink into it.



Would've been a neat little nod back to the first game and a crutch for those who keep forgeting to pick up ammo.



Also, it's the future... why can't Shepard get a big motherhubbing bag and fill it with heatsinks?

I don't get why he's running around with almost no storage capacity, he's a trained soldier!

[CatatonicMan]

LoweGear wrote...

What beeping in ME2 may I ask? 

Let the beeping stand in for whatever sounds/visual effects you get when health/shields are low.

[General9999]

Only in Mass effect technology goes backwards

[Sdrol117]

All i know is that mass effect has had at least 3 different bullet types in generally the same time period. Thermal CLips, the metal shards from first game, and pellets. Whats next bioware? (ok pellets werent biowares idea but it made sence and shouldve stuck with massive 4000 pellet clips.) wouldve worked with the ammo and wuldve fit better.

[AzaZeLgaming]

... on the side note, it's funny, that Overheating actually was in ME2 beta, if you check the "documentary" videos. ^^

Check: ...@ 3:00 ->. The blue bar under the weapon and the message near reticule. So the answer to mudjmc question: "I don't understand why they just don't use both games' mechanics" ... they did, but for unknown reason, it was pulled off. Also IMO the beta's HUD interface was better than what we got now ... ofc it wouldn't need to be visible when out of combat, but I can't see any reason why they had to remove it completely.  "Ammo" display on the weapon model itself, was cool too.

Modifié par AzaZeLgaming, 20 février 2010 - 03:05 .