121 réponses à ce sujet

[SNascimento]

 

Easy fix is allow us to take on missions alone with a "Launch Solo" option in squad selectio. This would also add incentive to be careful while sneaking as you would have to fight harder/smarter if you messed up which would add to the thrill of sneaking(for me anyway).

It's an option, but I wouldn't exactly call it easy.

The reason being making good stealth takes a lot of different kind of efforts. Level design, enemy behavior and placement, sound and line of sight mechanics, etc. And in some ways that might go against a more battle oriented gameplay, like all Mass Effect games were. 

Splinter Cell Blacklist is the best exampleo of a game with very strong stealth but with also an excellent combat. It does what Mass Effect would have to do if it wanted to go that route. I would love that. My point is that it's not an organic evolution from the previous Mass Effect games and squadmates poses a challenge that Blacklist didn't have. And it's also important to note that you need people with previous experience with this kind of gameplay. 

 

[StealthGamer92]

 

 

It's an option, but I wouldn't exactly call it easy.

The reason being making good stealth takes a lot of different kind of efforts. Level design, enemy behavior and placement, sound and line of sight mechanics, etc. And in some ways that might go against a more battle oriented gameplay, like all Mass Effect games were. 

Splinter Cell Blacklist is the best exampleo of a game with very strong stealth but with also an excellent combat. It does what Mass Effect would have to do if it wanted to go that route. I would love that. My point is that it's not an organic evolution from the previous Mass Effect games and squadmates poses a challenge that Blacklist didn't have. And it's also important to note that you need people with previous experience with this kind of gameplay. 

 

It would take some effort, but I'm confident if the developers really want to do it(not pushed to by suits) they easily could.

[Pasquale1234]

ME1 did this just fine:
 
Default:
Sprint: Shift
Crouch: ctrl
Take Cover: Context-sensitive automated
Activate: E key
 
It played like it was actually made for PC.
 
I do see how the cover system was a bit less predictable than in the other games, but I will never understand those who thought it was broken. I was playing Metal Gear Solid Ground Zeroes the other day and it has context-sensitive cover too and it works like a grace.
 
I'd much rather have automatic cover and crouching back for next-ME. Then we could get some proper stealth too.

I'd be a whole lot happier with the evolution if they'd just ease up on the stickiness - or allow us to adjust the sensitivity. You have to give cover a pretty wide berth in order to sprint past it, lest you stop and take cover. Also, I find that I often have to move the camera to successfully exit cover. As implemented, ME2&3's cover system is my single biggest source of discontent with combat.

[Vazgen]

ME1 did this just fine:

 

Default:

Sprint: Shift

Crouch: ctrl

Take Cover: Context-sensitive automated

Activate: E key

 

It played like it was actually made for PC.

 

I do see how the cover system was a bit less predictable than in the other games, but I will never understand those who thought it was broken. I was playing Metal Gear Solid Ground Zeroes the other day and it has context-sensitive cover too and it works like a grace.

 

I'd much rather have automatic cover and crouching back for next-ME. Then we could get some proper stealth too.

Personally I would prefer not having context-sensitive cover system. I like to have a choice whether to take cover or not. Oh, and I actually remapped Storm and and Interact to be the same Space button. Mostly because I rarely sprint in ME1, Shepard gets exhausted after a few steps

I agree on crouching and having it in ME:Next (you are actually forced to crouch in Citadel DLC) but I prefer to have activatable cover.

[CrutchCricket]

I don't know if stealth and Mass Effect would go well together. I'd love some stealth elements that doesn't degrade the combat - games like Far Cry 3, No One Lives Forever 2 and Splinter Cell Blacklist did this extremely well -, but even so, squad based gameplay doesn't go naturally with stealth.

No reason to think that. If anything it could add another layer to squadmate selection, since only certain squadmates are or would be intrinsically stealth- capable and/or only certain squadmates could become stealth capable (managing this would be another layer still). For example, if you did want to stealth, you might bring Kasumi and Thane instead of Grunt and Zaeed.

 

Having these kinds of "affinities" let's say, on squadmates beyond what they bring to the table with their powers and guns could decrease bench time for non-favorites.

 

Otherwise most of what I'd like has already been said, but just because it bears repeating:

 

• Lose thermal clips. If this Ark stuff is legit then we're going to be like the Protheans post Reaper invasion- requiring ammo free weaponry due to scarcity of resources. And even if that's not the case, thermal clips are stupid. There are other ways to increase the challenge and make it shooter-familiar.
• Lose the weight system (in SP)- it's pretty useless. I modded out of it and still end up using only one, possibly two weapons. If I want to carry the rest uselessly, who cares?
• Stealth gameplay (especially for infiltrators! assuming classes remain similar to what they are now)
• Ship combat
• Someone said zero g combat. Could be fun.
• Customizable vehicles (ground based and ship).

Hmm, felt like I had more...

[Pasquale1234]

Personally I would prefer not having context-sensitive cover system.

But the alternative is having context-sensitive controls.  As in, activate a control intending to do one thing, and something else happens because you were not in the correct 'context' for the thing you actually wanted to do.

Using context-sensitive controls is a 2-step process:
1) Get your character in the correct context for what you want to do.
2) Activate the control (cross your fingers, and hope you did step 1 correctly)

Here are a few examples of things that happened to me when first trying to learn the system (and still occasionally happen).

-- Stop and take cover when I want to sprint past it
-- Climb over the cover I want to to take
-- Take cover I want to climb over
-- Sprint away from the cover I want to take
-- Stand next to cover, madly trying to take it and get killed because the camera wasn't pointing in exactly the right direction for the desired 'context'

Honestly - I've never played an action game where I have more trouble trying to get the character to do what I want than ME2&3 - and it's all because of the cover system - the controls, the stickiness, and the placement of cover nodes in the level design.
 

I like to have a choice whether to take cover or not.

Me, too. And mapping a lot of different actions to the same button, making it all context-sensitive, doesn't do it for me.

[Vazgen]

But the alternative is having context-sensitive controls.  As in, activate a control intending to do one thing, and something else happens because you were not in the correct 'context' for the thing you actually wanted to do.

Using context-sensitive controls is a 2-step process:
1) Get your character in the correct context for what you want to do.
2) Activate the control (cross your fingers, and hope you did step 1 correctly)

Here are a few examples of things that happened to me when first trying to learn the system (and still occasionally happen).

-- Stop and take cover when I want to sprint past it
-- Climb over the cover I want to to take
-- Take cover I want to climb over
-- Sprint away from the cover I want to take
-- Stand next to cover, madly trying to take it and get killed because the camera wasn't pointing in exactly the right direction for the desired 'context'

Honestly - I've never played an action game where I have more trouble trying to get the character to do what I want than ME2&3 - and it's all because of the cover system - the controls, the stickiness, and the placement of cover nodes in the level design.
 

Me, too. And mapping a lot of different actions to the same button, making it all context-sensitive, doesn't do it for me.

Like I said, I'd like an ability to map different actions to different buttons while still being able to use the same button if I want to. With that system you should be able to map taking cover, sprinting, climbing over etc. to different buttons if you want to. 

The situations you described are a part of the learning curve. The more you play, the better you become and make these mistakes less. I did the same mistakes too. Nowadays, I rarely make even one through the course of the entire game. 

[Pasquale1234]

Like I said, I'd like an ability to map different actions to different buttons while still being able to use the same button if I want to. With that system you should be able to map taking cover, sprinting, climbing over etc. to different buttons if you want to. 
The situations you described are a part of the learning curve. The more you play, the better you become and make these mistakes less. I did the same mistakes too. Nowadays, I rarely make even one through the course of the entire game.

Mapping individual keys is a whole different enchilada on PC versus console, yes? If they could give me the ability to map *all* of the controller buttons individually, I'd be all for it.

I expect some learning curve with any new game, but a lot of people are not that patient, and don't re-play the same game over and over. If a learning curve is too steep or time-consuming, many people will just give up in frustration, and that doesn't bode well for the success of a release. I think it's fair to say that most people expect a game to be engaging and fun within the first hour or so - if it doesn't capture their interest or overly frustrates them, they're not going to stick around long enough to climb that learning curve.

Had it not been for the fact that I purchased the trilogy all at once, and became very invested in Shepard in ME1, I would have bailed on ME2 in the first few hours, and never looked back.

[Vazgen]

Mapping individual keys is a whole different enchilada on PC versus console, yes? If they could give me the ability to map *all* of the controller buttons individually, I'd be all for it.

I expect some learning curve with any new game, but a lot of people are not that patient, and don't re-play the same game over and over. If a learning curve is too steep or time-consuming, many people will just give up in frustration, and that doesn't bode well for the success of a release. I think it's fair to say that most people expect a game to be engaging and fun within the first hour or so - if it doesn't capture their interest or overly frustrates them, they're not going to stick around long enough to climb that learning curve.

Had it not been for the fact that I purchased the trilogy all at once, and became very invested in Shepard in ME1, I would have bailed on ME2 in the first few hours, and never looked back.

I only played on PC so I don't know how it is on consoles. 

And personally, I think ME2-ME3 learning curve is much easier to get the hang of, especially for people coming from shooter background. The fact that ME2 is praised as the best of the series (as baffling as I think this is) kinda proves that people have little trouble adjusting to a new system.

[Pasquale1234]

I only played on PC so I don't know how it is on consoles. 
And personally, I think ME2-ME3 learning curve is much easier to get the hang of, especially for people coming from shooter background. The fact that ME2 is praised as the best of the series (as baffling as I think this is) kinda proves that people have little trouble adjusting to a new system.

Is ME2 praised as the best of the series anywhere outside this forum? I ask because most of the denizens of this forum are folks who were presumably invested in the series prior to playing ME2, and have played it quite a few times. Not casual newcomers, the ~ 50% who didn't even finish the game once.

Also - I always figured people's fondness for ME2 wasn't about the combat, but the characters and content, including the SM. Some people's favorite waifus were squadmates only in ME2.

[Valkyrja]

Is ME2 praised as the best of the series anywhere outside this forum? I ask because most of the denizens of this forum are folks who were presumably invested in the series prior to playing ME2, and have played it quite a few times. Not casual newcomers, the ~ 50% who didn't even finish the game once.

Also - I always figured people's fondness for ME2 wasn't about the combat, but the characters and content, including the SM. Some people's favorite waifus were squadmates only in ME2.

 

Yes.

 

It wins almost by default. The ending soured people to ME3 and as a "game" ME1 is very troubled. For many ME2 offers the best over-all experience.

 

There is a sizable ME1 forever! vocal minority too.

[StealthGamer92]

Yes.

 

It wins almost by default. The ending soured people to ME3 and as a "game" ME1 is very troubled. For many ME2 offers the best over-all experience.

 

There is a sizable ME1 forever! vocal minority too.

ME1 was best! See?

[SuperJogi]

I would personally like to see a more tactical approach to combat. Does anyone remember the old rainbow six or ghost recon games? There the game dropped you on a pretty much open map where you could attack the enemy from multiple directions, place snipers and machine guns in good locations, and use all kinds of military gadgeds to ge the job done etc... Since ME is already a squad based game, this kind of playstyle fits perfectly and would give the combat much more depth and difficulty. Of course implementing RPG elements and stuff like biotics into a tactical shooter wouldn't be easy, but I'm just sick and tired of the Call of Duty like tube levels/shooting galleries. 

[Ambivalent]

I'd like to have a space combat. 

 

Pilot piloting the ship(O rly?) and your crew on turrets while you give them orders to concentrate fire, dodge the missiles, divert power to shields, jump to lightspeed, even taking control of ship from pilot or turrets from crew if you want to etc.

 

But it should be done in Star Wars Galaxies style instead of Battlefront style.

 

With seperate skill tree and level advancement, many upgrades that have their pros and cons etc. Even your crew members can have different skills that are useful in some situations while bad at others.

 

Can be a nice distraction to have both a single player and multiplayer parts i think.

 

PS: It might be in next ME:Next since it is too much work Still yeah, i'd love to have it.

[Felya87]

I'd like a class without guns. I'd lik to use more biotics and swords. The less guns, the better.

[SuperJogi]

I'd like a class without guns. I'd lik to use more biotics and swords. The less guns, the better.

 

Oh god please no. There are reasons why every modern armed force uses guns as their primary weapon and not swords. Swords are pretty much useless in any modern engagment unless you're walking around in some very heavy plot armor, like Kai Lame. And yes, that nickname is not a coincidence in this case. I'm not a fan of biotics either, I can understand their implementation for gameplay reasons, but they'll always stay space magic to me and I usually ignore them. Guns all the way! There is never enough dakka!

[StealthGamer92]

I would personally like to see a more tactical approach to combat. Does anyone remember the old rainbow six or ghost recon games? There the game dropped you on a pretty much open map where you could attack the enemy from multiple directions, place snipers and machine guns in good locations, and use all kinds of military gadgeds to ge the job done etc... Since ME is already a squad based game, this kind of playstyle fits perfectly and would give the combat much more depth and difficulty. Of course implementing RPG elements and stuff like biotics into a tactical shooter wouldn't be easy, but I'm just sick and tired of the Call of Duty like tube levels/shooting galleries. 

Rainbow 6 3 Hotel-Terrorist Hunt mode! I wasted many hours there, espeacially liked how those old game had non-regenerating health, remembered your partial clip reloads and would reuse them, and your squad could die!

[Felya87]

Oh god please no. There are reasons why every modern armed force uses guns as their primary weapon and not swords. Swords are pretty much useless in any modern engagment unless you're walking around in some very heavy plot armor, like Kai Lame. And yes, that nickname is not a coincidence in this case. I'm not a fan of biotics either, I can understand their implementation for gameplay reasons, but they'll always stay space magic to me and I usually ignore them. Guns all the way! There is never enough dakka!

 

I hate FPS. I'd like a class that let me play in a manner I like.

 

And Kai Lame was called like that because it was a character written by a drunk monkey, saved by unbelivable plot armour.

[Vazgen]

I'd like a class without guns. I'd lik to use more biotics and swords. The less guns, the better.

I'd welcome a "no guns" option. But swords... I'd rather not have them in the next game.

[Felya87]

I'd welcome a "no guns" option. But swords... I'd rather not have them in the next game.

 

why no? those are in the MP. I'd be ok with the biotic whips too. I'd like more melee combact. A class that is more comfortable for those that aren't good with guns.

[Vazgen]

why no? those are in the MP. I'd be ok with the biotic whips too. I'd like more melee combact. A class that is more comfortable for those that aren't good with guns.

I prefer a bayonet knife. I don't like those additions to ME combat. Whips, swords - feels like too "fantasy" to me. I would prefer less of such elements in ME. I'm against omni-blades too. Just personal preference.

[Malanek]

ME3 multiplayer should be looked at and considered as the primary source for inspiration. Sure, it can be improved on, but the game was exceptionally fun and successful. One of the biggest issues I had after moving back from multiplayer to the sp was the annoying time dilation effects. I really want them to be removed.

[Felya87]

ME3 multiplayer should be looked at and considered as the primary source for inspiration. Sure, it can be improved on, but the game was exceptionally fun and successful. One of the biggest issues I had after moving back from multiplayer to the sp was the annoying time dilation effects. I really want them to be removed.

I hated not having the dilateted time. I want play with calm and tactic. I hated MP For that. Too frenetic. Too FPS. I play ME For dtory and characters. I want an easier gameplay that let me have Fun.

[Malanek]

I hated not having the dilateted time. I want play with calm and tactic. I hated MP For that. Too frenetic. Too FPS. I play ME For dtory and characters. I want an easier gameplay that let me have Fun.

Time dilation is not about having the ability to pause if that is what you are thinking. It's when the pace of the game slows after you Biotic charge or trigger adrenaline rush, or scope with a infiltrator.

 

You have to remember it is a game, gameplay is important. I don't care whether they keep pause in or not so long as the game isn't designed around that and you can simply choose not to use it. But I have come to hate time dilation effects.

[SuperJogi]

I hated not having the dilateted time. I want play with calm and tactic. I hated MP For that. Too frenetic. Too FPS. I play ME For dtory and characters. I want an easier gameplay that let me have Fun.

 

If you think that FPS automaticly means fast paced and hectic then you never played a good tactical shooter. Also ME isn't an FPS anyway, it's third person if you really want to get technical.

If you want the game to be easier, turn down the difficulty. Making a game more tactical usually does the opposite, or did you find DA:O easier than DA2?