349 réponses à ce sujet

[Bigeyez]

Daeion wrote...

Bigeyez wrote...

Daeion wrote...


And instead of exploring planets we now have probe commander....

Exploring the same desert planet in different colors was fun to you? Because after the 50th slightly gray desert planet the "fun" of exploring in ME 1 kinda faded away for me.

It was a lot more interactive then playing probe commander.  I'm not saying the exploration worlds were always enjoyable, I mean they were all baren except for a handful of enemies and navigating around them was a pain in the mako, this however was something that could have been improved rather then scrapped.

Agreed on your sentiment, although think about it for a moment. How exactly would Bioware improve this? Creating individual worlds? If they did that we would then only be able to explore a handful of worlds, because theres no chance in hell Bioware would be able to crank out even a quarter of the number of planets we can visit if they were all truly unique. THAT was the problem Bioware had with the uncharted worlds in ME 1, and thats why they all ended up looking the same, witht he same pre-fab structures on them.

There really isn't a way to make exploring better, without either reducing the number of planets drastically or recyling the same planets over and over again. So scraping it altogether was the better decision IMO. I'd rather have the few uncharted worlds we can actually land on be interesting and not have to worry about exploring, then being forced to wade through the same crap again and again for the sake of doing missions and story.

Modifié par Bigeyez, 29 janvier 2010 - 03:25 .

[Originalshb]

Daeion wrote...

Originalshb wrote...

 But I must agree: the level of immersion in ME1 was just *that* much higher because of all of the mundane little things: the exploration, the inventory, the very-nearly arbitrary stats, the customizable weapon/armor mods (which I actually very, very sorely miss...this whole upgrade system is a far cry from the mod system which allowed you to quickly adapt to a wide range of tactical situations), etc. All of these things made you more involved in the game.

If i understand correctly.  You're trying to say that the level of immersion was GREATER because of  all the things the removed your from the story/action?

If thats accurate well i don't understand your position then. It would be like a movie where they constantly paused it so they could refill your popcorn or explain the plot.

But that wasn't my point at least (to be fair i didn't read the whole forum since i'm at work, shhh ) what I would argue is that the inventory in ME1 was pointless a facsimile of other systems.  If you ask me in ME1 the inventory was more obligatory than nessasary.

Arbitrary stats?  Actually other than the points i put into weapons i never used i didn't find many arbitrary. What might have been is if you wanted to take to team members with you and they both had spent points in something like decryption. thats wastefull.

Things like inventory, moding weapons, equiping your squadmates, deciding who to bring because you need that decrypting and hacking skill don't remove you from the game, they make you a part of it because you actually have to stop and think.  Sweet I just found this awesome light armor, should I give it to myself even though it's just a small upgrade, should I give it to Liara but it's a little more of an upgrade for her or should I give it to kaiden who it's a huge upgrade for but I only rarely bring on missions.  Those are the things that a lot of us are missing in ME2 becuase we nolonger have to stop and think about our squadmates, everything just trickles down to them and there's no thought process involved and we then don't feel as connected.

Then we can agree to disagree, i find those things seperate me from the game when poorly implemented.  Notice I said Poorly Implemented.  That is because it's the point of MY argument

[Typifire]

Originalshb wrote...


Then we can agree to disagree, i find those things seperate me from the game when poorly implemented.  Notice I said Poorly Implemented.  That is because it's the point of MY argument

If that's the only point of your argument, why not ask them to implement the elements properly, instead of getting rid of them? 

Saying that they were poorly implemented, so they shouldn't exist is constructing a false dilemma.  You set two extremes as the only options and ignore the myriad of possibilies that exist in between.   Somewhere between poorly implemented features and completely removed features, there exist features that have had their implementation improved.

Modifié par Typifire, 29 janvier 2010 - 03:38 .

[ShamieGTX]

Theres so many complain threads....they have lost appeal...

[Typifire]

xxSgt_Reed_24xx wrote...

Yeah, I said they were similiar with taking cover and what not.... but ME2 is leans more toward ME1 than it does GoW.

So, you would rather (in a future space faring world) have the hero kill everything with a pistol? That doesn't make much sense at all. I can totally see guns that freeze people, shoot multiple rockets, etc etc in a future type world like ME2. Battles are supposed to be fast-paced, exciting, and realistic.....at least, they are IMO. In ME1, I was so beast by the end of the game I could run in a room without squad mates, use zero powers, and clear the whole room with an AR. The enemies never can at me all at once or tried to get around behind me (not even on insanity). I can't see why anyone would hate the combat. Especially if its like combat in a game that they've played before and liked. I believe bioware's characters and story in this game make up (though I would say "add" ) to the fun or lackthereof in the new combat system.

Exactly, why do you think games are combining these elements, b/c more people buy them and IMO b/c they make the game more fun and satisfying. Personally, I loved Dead Space and Splinter Cell. Though I do believe ME2 has waaaay more RPGness to it than either of those games.

There were obviouly weapons other than pistols in the first universe.  You people love your false dilemmas.  Just because I don't want  Shepard toting around the BFG doesn't mean I want him to be limited to a chainsaw.  The weapon diversity in the first game was fine.  It all centered around ME technology, as in mass field generators, and I liked how that was tied together.

Games like Bioshoock benefit from RPG elements because it makes the mindless action less monotonous and more diverse.  I can't say that ME will benefit from going in the other direction.  But, once again, that's just my opinion.

Modifié par Typifire, 29 janvier 2010 - 03:45 .

[Typifire]

ShamieGTX wrote...

Theres so many complain threads....they have lost appeal...

Yet, you still post.  How odd...

[Elanareon]

Actually the inventory mechancs of this game is better given the settings. But i agreee that this game does not feel an rpg anymore... Not that its bad but i was expecting an rpg game...

[kiyyto]

OP:

you do understand that these forums are monitored, right?

you do understand that you are on the website of the company which made the game, right?

you do understand that EA are a bunch of gamer hating lying bastards, right?



Well, with that said... you cannot expect but at least 10 trolls for every valid comment.



Mass Effect 2 sucks balls.

It is nothing like any other BioWare game I've ever played.

Mass Effect 2 is a stripped down, shelled out skeleton of what Mass Effect was and instead of actually adding features to Mass Effect in order to make ME2 a better game, they have removed almost all of the rpg features and are trying to cram a bunch of LOSELY CONNECTED IRRELEVANT DRIVEL OF A DIALOGUE, and pass that off as the next best thing since sliced bread.



The story does not pull me in, not even a little. In fact, it irritates me.

This game is such an utter disappointment.

Mass Effect 2 tastes like cardboard, might as well be playing The Incredible Hulk.



Gas stations in space?

I have to buy gas on an ugly 2D side scrolling map? (with the same music as ME which fit ME but completely doesn't fit in ME2)



I have to buy "probes" to shoot onto a planet in order to know what the planet is composed of?

Sorry folks, but we can scan our own planet from the stratosphere, and we could scan planets in ME, but in ME2 we have to shoot crap-tastic probes up the sphincter of EA in order to get 1 of 4 possible elements. (4 elements are all we need to travel the galaxy and save the universe, huh?)



Anyone notice how horribly ugly and uniform all of the planets have become in ME2?

In ME, scanning a planet was completely unnecessary, but I liked to do it because looking at the planets was FUN. The music was right on and the planets were artfully designed, it was dark, it was lonely, it felt like SPACE. Planets in ME2 feel like they just fell out of a god damned gumball machine.



I hate you EA. I hate you more than I hate this new diluted mass effect 2. I hope you all lose your jobs and eat dirt. Long live the pirate bay and go cuss yourselves.



Music more appropriate for ME2's 2D navigation can be found in any nintendo of america game from 1980 to 89, maybe beyond.



Stage complete screens?

What the cuss?

WHY?

WHY?

WHY?

Why do you want to destroy every sense of immersion I could possibly squeeze out of this game. Stage complete screens are for games like Mario Brothers. Whoever made this feature should be SHOT DEAD. It is hard enough as it is to like watered down ME2, and the stage complete screens are a constant reminder of how horribly wrong this quote unquote sequel has turned. It feels as though whoever made this game is purposefully trying to take anyone who liked ME and stab them right in the face, slap them upside the head and say:

"You liked Mass Effect, huh?

Well, ****** on you, here's Mass Effect 2.

How do you like them apples?"



Why do you hate us EA?

Why do you have to come to everything we like and ****** all over it with your watered down ****** and your anal sales expectations.



The illusive man.

The illusive man is not a name. Even in a game as disappointing as this, characters ought to have names. As ass as the name Zaeed is, it is better than "the illusive man" (voiced by none other than Martin Sheen who is a hundred and fifty years old and might as well be a bullwhip cracking me on the back, because his voice is quite distinctive and everytime he ****ing speaks all I HEAR IS THE OVAL OFFICE!)



Go to hell, you, whoever put Martin Sheen in this game, without a name. Go straight to hell and burn, slowly.



Someone somewhere, or a group of someone's somewhere have cannibalized the game Mass Effect and are prostituting its rotting corpse for $49.99 or more.



Mass Effect 2 is complete garbage. The game is obviously not done. There is a skeleton of a great BioWare game here, that is all. I've been playing the game for about 4 hours now. I had to register my complaint now because it is so irritating, that I actually waited and paid for this crap.



Never again EA, BioWare, whoever did this crap, NEVER AGAIN!



Now,

it occurs to me that some people might think I'm actually upset. Well, I don't give a rat's ass. I don't have to play Mass Effect 2. I just want to assure the OP that he is correct. This game sucks balls. This game is NOT Mass Effect 2, this is EA's Mass Effect 2.



I think that this game could have been fantastic given another 2 years development, and that is probably what would have happened had BioWare remained its own, unless they really don't give a rat's ass either anymore.



Although you are going to be swarmed by idiots and people paid to say nice things (yes, they exist and I know someone who lives in Brooklyn who does this for work, don't care if you believe me, they call themselves social engineers or some other bull**** and sit around all day long twittering and texting and emailing and such to improve the image of businesses which hire them.) - let me assure you of one thing...



This is not Mass Effect 2.

[Elanareon]

P.S the game is still fun though, i just wished they didn't remove some of the me1 elements. Like the downloading elevator screen and the leaving the normandy scene, and the abilities!!! There's so few!

[Originalshb]

Typifire wrote...

Originalshb wrote...


Then we can agree to disagree, i find those things seperate me from the game when poorly implemented.  Notice I said Poorly Implemented.  That is because it's the point of MY argument

If that's the only point of your argument, why not ask them to implement the elements properly, instead of getting rid of them? 

Saying that they were poorly implemented, so they shouldn't exist is constructing a false dilemma.  You set two extremes as the only options and ignore the myriad of possibilies that exist in between.   Somewhere between poorly implemented features and completely removed features, there exist features that have had their implementation improved.

I'd rather not have a feature than to have a poorly implemented one.  My point was aimed at the myriad of posters complaining at the loss of inventory.  I was pointing out that they didn't loss much since it wasn't a  good implementation anyway.  

But on the point of asking them to "fix" it, ME1 really lacked any mechanics that required an inventory to begin with which is why i called it a facsimile in the first place. I always felt it was only there because thats what people EXPECT anything rpg based to have (so many posters have proven that point) but honestly they don't.  RPG is such a broad category these days, IMO to add the kind of features, that would probably take the game a completey different direction than what the developers probably intended. And there would be the risk of the oblivion effect 

[Looy]

You lot do realise ME1 had terrible combat, no one played it for the combat and the combat didn't stand up on its own?

[Typifire]

Elanareon wrote...

P.S the game is still fun though, i just wished they didn't remove some of the me1 elements. Like the downloading elevator screen and the leaving the normandy scene, and the abilities!!! There's so few!

 I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

I hated the elevator and entering and leaving the Normandy.  I also hated putting points into learning weapons.  But I expected them to replace the weapon talents with something more useful.  Instead we just got fewer abilities.

I didn't enjoy the cluttered inventory, but I would have liked a solution instead of a removal.

I looked forward to planetary exploration when I started playing the first game, but it quickly became monotonous and tedious.  But that doesn't mean i don't like the idea of exploration, I just didn't like how it was implemented.  Once again, that could have been fixed instead of removed.

THe Mako could have simply been replaced by a craft that didn't need WHEELS.  I mean, good grief, everything else in the game levitates with ME fields, why can't my exploration craft?

The first game was flawed in many ways.  But they fixed these flaws by completing removing the flawed element, and I feel I got back half a game.

And to whoever said armor had stats, please point me to them.  As far as I could tell, armor had bonuses, but I saw no armor rating.  +5 Health is a bonus not a stat.

[hankscorpio21]

I love how most people on here take their opinion as gospel and trash anyone who differs.

Modifié par hankscorpio21, 29 janvier 2010 - 04:36 .

[Typifire]

Looy wrote...

You lot do realise ME1 had terrible combat, no one played it for the combat and the combat didn't stand up on its own?

 
That's a matter of opinion.  No one I know who played the first complained of the combat.  Two friends who are playing ME 2 on the Xbox 360 right now complained to me about the change in combat mechanics initially, asking why they needed to fix something that wasn't broken, though they said they'd keep playing it for the story.  I'll likely do that my self.

But let's not be so quick to assume that just because we believe something to be true, that it is fact.  You may have not liked the combat in the first, and many others may agree with you.  But I had no probelms with it, and neither did many others.

Modifié par Typifire, 29 janvier 2010 - 04:39 .

[Gilded Age]

hankscorpio21 wrote...

I love how most people on here take their opinion as gospel and trash anyone who differs.

Welcome to the internet.   

Enjoy your stay.

[Graunt]

Typifire wrote...

I can't belive they did this to what was until now my favorite RPG.  There is little in this game that could even be considered an RPG anymore.

And I don't want to get into a battle of semantics regarding the definition of RPG.  I know that strictly speaking this game involes playing a role.  But in a world full of first/third person shooters with RPG elelements, why do we need another? 

This is the biggest disappointment I've yet to come across in gaming.  No Inventory!!!  Seriosuly?!!  Even Dead Space has an inventory. 

What we have now is the same game mechanoics as Gears of War, but with some extra powers, companions and the ability to control dialogue.  That's it!!

There are no visiible weapon and armor statistics.  There will be no more filtering down old gear to other companions.  There are no weapon mods.  For every good change there is  bad change that does far more damage than the good change implemented.

For christ's sake, I could head shot every mech in the tutorial level, and switched to a grendae launcher for the heavy mech!!!  This is not the game I paid to play.  And I will not support this game title in the future.  I will likely return this immediately, in fact.

I guess now I'll get back to Dragon Age.

Because the combat from the first game was soooo great right?    I'm not huge shooter fan, but the direction they went with the combat is vastly superior to the original.  You want "roleplaying?"  Then try playing the role of someone who can actually shoot a gun instead of having the computer do it for you.  Combat was one of the most annoying things from the first game and for the most part you were doing it solo while carrying around two utility knives that would shoot boxes, each other as well as destroying the Mako.

[LordRikerQ]

Terror_K wrote...

If BioWare had intended for the original Mass Effect to be like ME2 is they would have gone for the simpler and less stats-heavy shooter oriented gameplay in the first place instead of giving us a system where we have to level-up our stats to determine our ability to shoot. If they had intended it they wouldn't have gone with a more complex system rather than a simple twitch-based TPS one, and they would have had an ammo system from the start.

No... BioWare did NOT intend for this to be the way ME was in the first place. They've changed their intentions for the series because too many players were put off by the fact it didn't play like a proper third person shooter in the first place.

Ironically it's the old RPG fans who get called whiners for complaining about the changes rather than the Shooter Fanatics that whined about the way it was in the first place now that they've been placated.

QFT

This right there, these idiot shooter fanatics ruined a great series. Its really said Bioware sold out because these people whined it wasnt Shooter enough.

[Typifire]

Graunt wrote...

Typifire wrote...

I can't belive they did this to what was until now my favorite RPG.  There is little in this game that could even be considered an RPG anymore.

And I don't want to get into a battle of semantics regarding the definition of RPG.  I know that strictly speaking this game involes playing a role.  But in a world full of first/third person shooters with RPG elelements, why do we need another? 

This is the biggest disappointment I've yet to come across in gaming.  No Inventory!!!  Seriosuly?!!  Even Dead Space has an inventory. 

What we have now is the same game mechanoics as Gears of War, but with some extra powers, companions and the ability to control dialogue.  That's it!!

There are no visiible weapon and armor statistics.  There will be no more filtering down old gear to other companions.  There are no weapon mods.  For every good change there is  bad change that does far more damage than the good change implemented.

For christ's sake, I could head shot every mech in the tutorial level, and switched to a grendae launcher for the heavy mech!!!  This is not the game I paid to play.  And I will not support this game title in the future.  I will likely return this immediately, in fact.

I guess now I'll get back to Dragon Age.

Because the combat from the first game was soooo great right?    I'm not huge shooter fan, but the direction they went with the combat is vastly superior to the original.  You want "roleplaying?"  Then try playing the role of someone who can actually shoot a gun instead of having the computer do it for you.  Combat was one of the most annoying things from the first game and for the most part you were doing it solo while carrying around two utility knives that would shoot boxes, each other as well as destroying the Mako.

Once again, a matter of opinion. 

But thanks for assuming your opinion is right and mine is wrong, and adding nothing to the discussion.

Thank you, also, for ignoring any of the posts where I stated that I play shooters on a regular basis, and have since Wolfenstein 3D, and thus this complaint is not based on the fact that I don't like the genre.  Or can't play the genre, which seems to get pulled out as a red herring any time this type of discussion takes place.

Also, if you notice I said one of the things I didn't like was being able to get head shots over and over again.  If I had trouble aiming, I don't think this would be one of my complaints.

Before Dragon Age and ME 2 the last 7 games I played were shooters.  I simply didn't want that kind of gameplay from ME 2.

Modifié par Typifire, 29 janvier 2010 - 04:53 .

[Originalshb]

Typifire wrote...

Elanareon wrote...

P.S the game is still fun though, i just wished they didn't remove some of the me1 elements. Like the downloading elevator screen and the leaving the normandy scene, and the abilities!!! There's so few!

 I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

I hated the elevator and entering and leaving the Normandy.  I also hated putting points into learning weapons.  But I expected them to replace the weapon talents with something more useful.  Instead we just got fewer abilities.

I didn't enjoy the cluttered inventory, but I would have liked a solution instead of a removal.

I looked forward to planetary exploration when I started playing the first game, but it quickly became monotonous and tedious.  But that doesn't mean i don't like the idea of exploration, I just didn't like how it was implemented.  Once again, that could have been fixed instead of removed.

THe Mako could have simply been replaced by a craft that didn't need WHEELS.  I mean, good grief, everything else in the game levitates with ME fields, why can't my exploration craft?

The first game was flawed in many ways.  But they fixed these flaws by completing removing the flawed element, and I feel I got back half a game.

And to whoever said armor had stats, please point me to them.  As far as I could tell, armor had bonuses, but I saw no armor rating.  +5 Health is a bonus not a stat.

fewer abilities. mm not sure i have about 4 or 5 now. which is all i had in the 1st one.

The gear you can swap out does have bonus/stats +5 health is a stat if you ask me and trying to separate the 2 is like splitting hairs.  I mean honestly what do you want? +5 constitution?

most RPG's get into a case where you're equipment will scale with lvl ie while you may have this bad ass weapon you can't use it till X lvl anyway. In ME1 it worked where what was dropping was based on you're lvl.  That system is kind inane but it's not to different than the 1st case i described. point is, it's pointless.  Armor had only 3 stats, weapons had only 3 stats. they all scaled relatively the same. the few exceptions were armor that had high shields and armor than had high biotic resistance, but in the new system we can just equip different legs ect to create a gear set up that is more specific to our play style! which provides greater player customization.  which is just more reason they didn't need an inventory.  On my point of inventory again. i wasn't needed, which is why "fixing" it wasn't the best option.

*edited a missunderstanding i had

Modifié par Originalshb, 29 janvier 2010 - 05:03 .

[Bigeyez]

LordRikerQ wrote...

QFT

This right there, these idiot shooter fanatics ruined a great series. Its really said Bioware sold out because these people whined it wasnt Shooter enough.

Here's a perfect example of why you people get bashed every time you make these threads. The "zomgz they are liek losers" arguement doesn't hold much water.

[Bigeyez]

Typifire wrote...

Once again, a matter of opinion. 

But thanks for assuming your opinion is right and mine is wrong, and adding nothing to the discussion.

Thank you, also, for ignoring any of the posts where I stated that I play shooters on a regular basis, and have since Wolfenstein 3D, and thus this complaint is not based on the fact that I don't like the genre.  Or can't play the genre, which seems to get pulled out as a red herring any time this type of discussion takes place.

Also, if you notice I said one of the things I didn't like was being able to get head shots over and over again.  If I had trouble aiming, I don't think this would be one of my complaints.

Before Dragon Age and ME 2 the last 7 games I played were shooters.  I simply didn't want that kind of gameplay from ME 2.

Your right. What he and many others are saying is a matter of opinion. It just so happens to be an opinion shared by the vast majority of players and reviewers. Removing the inventory system and fixing the broken combat were two of the major complaints most people had with the first game, and now that they are gone most people applaud the changes.

If you truly don't like that Mass Effect combat has changed don't play it, and don't bother with ME 3, because judging by the review scores and what I bet is going to be a huge amount of retail sold the combat is staying this way.

[Typifire]

Originalshb wrote...

Typifire wrote...

Elanareon wrote...

P.S the game is still fun though, i just wished they didn't remove some of the me1 elements. Like the downloading elevator screen and the leaving the normandy scene, and the abilities!!! There's so few!

 I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

I hated the elevator and entering and leaving the Normandy.  I also hated putting points into learning weapons.  But I expected them to replace the weapon talents with something more useful.  Instead we just got fewer abilities.

I didn't enjoy the cluttered inventory, but I would have liked a solution instead of a removal.

I looked forward to planetary exploration when I started playing the first game, but it quickly became monotonous and tedious.  But that doesn't mean i don't like the idea of exploration, I just didn't like how it was implemented.  Once again, that could have been fixed instead of removed.

THe Mako could have simply been replaced by a craft that didn't need WHEELS.  I mean, good grief, everything else in the game levitates with ME fields, why can't my exploration craft?

The first game was flawed in many ways.  But they fixed these flaws by completing removing the flawed element, and I feel I got back half a game.

And to whoever said armor had stats, please point me to them.  As far as I could tell, armor had bonuses, but I saw no armor rating.  +5 Health is a bonus not a stat.

fewer abilities. mm not sure i have about 4 or 5 now. I learned 2 from other characters using research.

The gear you can swap out does have bonus/stats +5 health is a stat if you ask me and trying to separate the 2 is like splitting hairs.  I mean honestly what do you want? +5 constitution?

most RPG's get into a case where you're equipment will scale with lvl ie while you may have this bad ass weapon you can't use it till X lvl anyway. In ME1 it worked where what was dropping was based on you're lvl.  That system is kind inane but it's not to different than the 1st case i described. point is, it's pointless.  Armor had only 3 stats, weapons had only 3 stats. they all scaled relatively the same. the few exceptions were armor that had high shields and armor than had high biotic resistance, but in the new system we can just equip different legs ect to create a gear set up that is more specific to our play style! which provides greater player customization.  which is just more reason they didn't need an inventory.  On my point of inventory again. i wasn't needed, which is why "fixing" it wasn't the best option.

Armor stats are how effective the armor is at stopping damage versus another armor.  An armor giving you plus 5 health, has always been considered an item bonus in RPGs. Stats are the effectiveness of one item versus another item of similar nature.  X Armor has X shileds, X damage protection, and X amount of mod slots.  That is an armor's stats.  An armor giving you +5 health, is an armor with an item bonus.

On the bright side of the armor situation, I love the appearance customization.

Ability wise there were 10-15 in the original game.  When they said they removed the weapon skills, I assumed they would replace them with better abilities. Instead now specialized ammo is an ability, and you have less abilities than before.  Not less usable abilities, mind you, but I was hoping they'd replace them with more "fun" abilities.

In your opinion, the inventory wasn't necessary.  I agree that it's more realistic now, but I liked customizing the weapons and armor with mods.

This is a purely subjective matter.  I'm merely voicing my opinion.  You don't have to agree.  But since I'm not stating that my opinion is fact, I would appreciate you doing the same.

[Mezinger]

Whack a mole! Gears of War with some dialogue... totally true... totally sad.

[RogueAI]

I'm fine with the probe things... if it was quicker to do it.

I'm fine with the "improve shooter gameplay"... if it didn't effect the RPG elements.

I'm fine with the customize armor... if you didn't take out all the unique armors and use them as pre-order bonuses.



Take away space fish, space hamsters, etc... Completely useless. Why are all the stores so low on stock? Why do I only have access to one type of visor, and the others are in Dr. Pepper promotions I can't even be apart of because I don't live in the U.S.



Oh, look. I can change my allies suits... Oh, it is just a small switch in color.... fail...

Oh, look. I only have 2 different assault rifles, 2 different submachine guns, 1 shotgun, etc... Wow, the choices are amazing.... not.



Biotics are gimped beyond belief, forcing you to play the game purely as a shooter.



I was on board with the "no points into weapons" until I saw that a character apparently forgot sabotage, and my character had barely any powers to level up.



What is good (for the fanboys to shut up)

-Atmosphere is much better (ex. After Life club)

-Normandy is awesome

-Characters are better than I expected (the trailers for them are atrocious)

-Much darker tone

-Squad-mates' loyalty missions.



/rant



This game will go down in history as the most dumb-down sequel, ever. Right now, everyone is stuck in the hype, but it will only take a few months before that wears off.

[Originalshb]

Typifire wrote...

Originalshb wrote...

Typifire wrote...

Elanareon wrote...

P.S the game is still fun though, i just wished they didn't remove some of the me1 elements. Like the downloading elevator screen and the leaving the normandy scene, and the abilities!!! There's so few!

 I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

I hated the elevator and entering and leaving the Normandy.  I also hated putting points into learning weapons.  But I expected them to replace the weapon talents with something more useful.  Instead we just got fewer abilities.

I didn't enjoy the cluttered inventory, but I would have liked a solution instead of a removal.

I looked forward to planetary exploration when I started playing the first game, but it quickly became monotonous and tedious.  But that doesn't mean i don't like the idea of exploration, I just didn't like how it was implemented.  Once again, that could have been fixed instead of removed.

THe Mako could have simply been replaced by a craft that didn't need WHEELS.  I mean, good grief, everything else in the game levitates with ME fields, why can't my exploration craft?

The first game was flawed in many ways.  But they fixed these flaws by completing removing the flawed element, and I feel I got back half a game.

And to whoever said armor had stats, please point me to them.  As far as I could tell, armor had bonuses, but I saw no armor rating.  +5 Health is a bonus not a stat.

fewer abilities. mm not sure i have about 4 or 5 now. I learned 2 from other characters using research.

The gear you can swap out does have bonus/stats +5 health is a stat if you ask me and trying to separate the 2 is like splitting hairs.  I mean honestly what do you want? +5 constitution?

most RPG's get into a case where you're equipment will scale with lvl ie while you may have this bad ass weapon you can't use it till X lvl anyway. In ME1 it worked where what was dropping was based on you're lvl.  That system is kind inane but it's not to different than the 1st case i described. point is, it's pointless.  Armor had only 3 stats, weapons had only 3 stats. they all scaled relatively the same. the few exceptions were armor that had high shields and armor than had high biotic resistance, but in the new system we can just equip different legs ect to create a gear set up that is more specific to our play style! which provides greater player customization.  which is just more reason they didn't need an inventory.  On my point of inventory again. i wasn't needed, which is why "fixing" it wasn't the best option.

Armor stats are how effective the armor is at stopping damage versus another armor.  An armor giving you plus 5 health, has always been considered an item bonus in RPGs. Stats are the effectiveness of one item versus another item of similar nature.  X Armor has X shileds, X damage protection, and X amount of mod slots.  That is an armor's stats.  An armor giving you +5 health, is an armor with an item bonus.

On the bright side of the armor situation, I love the appearance customization.

Ability wise there were 10-15 in the original game.  When they said they removed the weapon skills, I assumed they would replace them with better abilities. Instead now specialized ammo is an ability, and you have less abilities than before.  Not less usable abilities, mind you, but I was hoping they'd replace them with more "fun" abilities.

In your opinion, the inventory wasn't necessary.  I agree that it's more realistic now, but I liked customizing the weapons and armor with mods.

This is a purely subjective matter.  I'm merely voicing my opinion.  You don't have to agree.  But since I'm not stating that my opinion is fact, I would appreciate you doing the same.

Research = mods, they just replaced one with the other.

As for the nature of Opinions.  To the party holding the opinion it is fact. It's a perspective issue, i'm not saying your wrong (at least not out right) but i am giving you my reasoning why i think my opinion is valid (as you are doing as well) thats the nature of debate.

The case of Armor and stats is a funny one as well
Most RPG's would have you increase your stats to keep up with stronger enemies' so your progression correlates with the games progression but lets assume a case where the enemies don't actually do more damage, then do you need those stats? no not really at that point the stats are pointless.