I never knew about the Japanese thing the more you know I guess.
But Wouldn't you think we should do the same inspire our own solders, I know I would of like to carry a sword or something similar on the suicide mission and priority earth, and maybe some bagpipes. the little details matter.
Shepard already inspired the galaxy with presence, actions, and words.
"S/he's a hero. A bloody icon."
Shepard already inspired the galaxy with presence, actions, and words.
"S/he's a hero. A bloody icon."
Well a little more never could hurt. and besides this new guy/gal is from what I know is a nobody unlike Shep who could be a war hero a sole survivor, or Ruthless... um but you get what I mean
I think I basically agree with CrutchCricket on this one. It doesn't make much sense. But if it enriches game play and you can make it fit the setting or make it cool enough we turn a blind eye to how it breaks the setting great go for it bioware.
I find it hilarious how people defend one nonsense mechanic designed to justify the game not being a proper shooter versus the second nonsense mechanic designed to justify the switch from the first nonsnse mechanic to the game being a proper shooter.
Glad you had your laugh, now kindly get involved in the discussion or leave. Remark's like these are unneeded and counterproductive as some people will argue with you over comment's like this, fortunatelly(or maybe unfortunately if you wanted an argument to start) arguing over jab's like this doesn't interest me.
The size of the rounds never changed.
The change Lore-Wise occurred starting with the Geth, that realized that battles were ultimately won by the side that could send the most bullets down range. Since soldiers were frequently having to fire in short bursts or sit around while guns overheated, the Geth found a workaround that everyone else eventually adopted. The 'overheat' mechanic was removed as having both would increase the weight of all guns considerably, thus standard military weapons did not contain both. They should but that's another story all on its own. . .I mean, you think the geth wouldn't worry about encumbrance. . .and that mercs would customize their guns to save money on clips in the long run. . .and other such things. . .
That make's the change even dumber than I'd previously thought! The willingness of player's to ignore this just so this will feel more like modern weapon's is...I just don't get people, we have 100's of game's that conform to ammo and traditional bullet and weapon mechanic's yet something new come's along and of course isn't perfect first try so people ****** and we get another game added to the hundred's to appease the impatient whiner's.
That make's the change even dumber than I'd previously thought! The willingness of player's to ignore this just so this will feel more like modern weapon's is...I just don't get people, we have 100's of game's that conform to ammo and traditional bullet and weapon mechanic's yet something new come's along and of course isn't perfect first try so people ****** and we get another game added to the hundred's to appease the impatient whiner's.
I'd say you're the one whining right now. 
I enjoyed the gunplay in ME2, where I entered into the series, and moreso in ME3. I finally bit the bullet, pun intended, and played ME1 and I enjoyed the overheat system but I can understand the lore reason for swapping to a different muntion system, but then I also see the reasoning behind why the new system still has flaws in it on both the OOC and the IC level, especially in the Reaper War where getting new shipments of thermal clips isn't going to be easy, and having to deal with waves of husks (thus Omni-Tool Weapons like the Omni-Blade) makes that ammo even more precious.
They wrote themselves into a corner with the ammo change mechanic (especially since Shepard has been dead for two years and seems perfectly unphased by a gun that uses different tech from what s/he had in ME1, given the collector attack happens only a month or so after the end of ME1), though I think it is just as easy to re-write this by coming up with a new lightweight alloy allowing both systems to be implemented into a gun that now operates as follows:
Here is an example:
The player can only carry ten thermal clips, with passive upgrades increasing the amount they can carry based on class. The player uses an Avenger which has a thirty round clip. The player can tap the trigger to fire out bursts and stay safe and let the weapon cooldown as was the case in Mass Effect 1, but in situations where a large amount of firepower is necessary the player can maintain a stream of bullets by firing full-auto and popping a few clips. If the player runs out of clips and can't move safely to get more, but the fighting is not over, they can revert back to burst fire tactics and the overheat system.
I'd say you're the one whining right now.
I enjoyed the gunplay in ME2, where I entered into the series, and moreso in ME3. I finally bit the bullet, pun intended, and played ME1 and I enjoyed the overheat system but I can understand the lore reason for swapping to a different muntion system, but then I also see the reasoning behind why the new system still has flaws in it on both the OOC and the IC level, especially in the Reaper War where getting new shipments of thermal clips isn't going to be easy, and having to deal with waves of husks (thus Omni-Tool Weapons like the Omni-Blade) makes that ammo even more precious.
They wrote themselves into a corner with the ammo change mechanic (especially since Shepard has been dead for two years and seems perfectly unphased by a gun that uses different tech from what s/he had in ME1, given the collector attack happens only a month or so after the end of ME1), though I think it is just as easy to re-write this by coming up with a new lightweight alloy allowing both systems to be implemented into a gun that now operates as follows:
- Only a set amount of thermal clips can be carried. These thermal clips are universal so you have to manage them or acquire new ones some way.
- Guns are used as normal, having a 'clip capacity' before overheating that can cooldown.
- When the gun overheats, you can either wait for it to cooldown or you can 'pop the heat sink' and insert a new thermal clip. This let's you continue to push a large amount of gunfire down range, and is especially beneficial to a soldier class character who relies on gunfire the most.
Here is an example:
The player can only carry ten thermal clips, with passive upgrades increasing the amount they can carry based on class. The player uses an Avenger which has a thirty round clip. The player can tap the trigger to fire out bursts and stay safe and let the weapon cooldown as was the case in Mass Effect 1, but in situations where a large amount of firepower is necessary the player can maintain a stream of bullets by firing full-auto and popping a few clips. If the player runs out of clips and can't move safely to get more, but the fighting is not over, they can revert back to burst fire tactics and the overheat system.
Yeah guess so. 
I do so though with the knowledge that my opinion doesn't matter since I'm in the minority(as I often am), not like I'm expecting it to change. Also the system you propose is the best one I've seen and hope a future ME can use it, but I have no reason to believe this ME will worry about the believeability of clip's lying all around anymore than the last two. I still voice my opinion, and whine in hope that eventually ME will go from being good to being great(subjective I know) again like ME1 was despite it's flaw's. Honestly when I think about it like now, I'd be willing to shut up if the Heatsink's would cool off over time if not used to 0(which would cause the material to warp as an excuse). I never used anything but the Avenger and Viper in ME2 and same in ME3 except Avenger was eventually replaced Lancer after Homecoming and in neither game did my Infiltrator use even 50% of his ammo so reloading as a mechanic was an annoyance and not a game changer for me.
Glad you had your laugh, now kindly get involved in the discussion or leave. Remark's like these are unneeded and counterproductive as some people will argue with you over comment's like this, fortunatelly(or maybe unfortunately if you wanted an argument to start) arguing over jab's like this doesn't interest me.
I will say that from the perspective of pure fun, the two characters I had the most fun playing in ME3 MP would be the Krogan Warlord with the biotic hammer, and the Talon Mercenary with the omni-bow.
I think when you look at things from the perspective of pure optimization - what's the most logical, what's the most effective, what's the most practical - sometimes it becomes a little boring. Things get homogenized. Everyone's wearing the same armor, everyone's using the same regulation issued equipment. That's great for realw world military practice, but in fiction, it can be a bit bland.
Again, I do think that the original post takes things too far and I don't think the specifics requested fit with the tone of ME at all. I don't want to see this franchise turn into something as stylized as Shadowrun or as over the top ridiculous as Warhammer 40,000. But I don't see a little more flavor, and the allowance for people to make illogical, impractical decisions in the name of personal preference, as an inherently bad thing.
Again, I do think that the original post takes things too far and I don't think the specifics requested fit with the tone of ME at all. I don't want to see this franchise turn into something as stylized as Shadowrun or as over the top ridiculous as Warhammer 40,000. But I don't see a little more flavor, and the allowance for people to make illogical, impractical decisions in the name of personal preference, as an inherently bad thing.
This is the stance I've been arguing this whole time.
OP wants dramatic and overly fantastical mechanics that neither fit within the gameplay system we have in place (which is a good one; one I see as being upgraded and calibrated rather than replaced), the lore, or the series in general. If this was Star Wars, Dragon Age, Warhammer 40k, any other other such series I could see such dramatic depictions of melee combat being a thing not to mention a necessity (could you imagine a star wars game where you play as a jedi who doesn't use their lightsaber for anything but a simple melee attack?), but for Mass Effect?
Keep it limited yet fun, but keep the focus being on guns, powers, and the relative realism of the series. My favorite character in the Multiplayer remains the Krogan Soldier as a primarily melee build and then the Talon using the Omni-Bow to accent their firearms usage, but even then I understand that melee/omni-bow combat is not a dramatic affair with back-flips, banshee decapitations en masse, yadda yadda. Though I would not be against more melee enemy units, so long as they are dedicated to it and are not humanoid in nature (AKA beasts, constructs, or twisted aominations like Praetorians.), I don't think the play should be able to fight them on even ground in that regard.
I honestly have no problem with blades being in the game.
Kinda wondered what Mass Effect would be like with stealth kills. Like splinter cell.
How old are you? Sorry to appear condescending, or insulting, but this is not how you argue if you want an argument to mean anything. I am not calling you fat. This is what I meant by don't get hostile. Every point you made I have countered but instead of acknowledging that you use a common internet argument technique which is to 'move the goalposts'. Simply put you make a new argument.
You asked for the lore required for 'bows and arrows, among other suggested weapons, to appear in Andromeda.
I believe the Mass Effect universe is an alternate future to our reality and that it shares our history. So, I claimed if their are bows and arrows today when they are pretty redundant there may be bows and arrows in the future or any fictional future.
Oh this is rich. You accuse me of moving the goalposts and then you write something like this. I ask or rather say "there should be lore that specifically makes this viable somehow" you reply with "ME is an alternate universe and bows exist today, and stuff so... yeah". Maybe I should be asking you how old you are, or better yet if you're just taking the ******.
Then you claim the lore doesn't really matter it is whether or not the weapon is used as a primary weapon in any modern military.
I pointed out if that was a determinating factor in what weapons Bioware choose to implement in the Mass Effect universe that Katanas would not be a part of the game.
Point out specifically where I said lore doesn't matter. Direct quotes only please. The katanas in ME3 were given lore by the way. See "monomolecular blade" (may not have its own codex/wiki article but will be included in the articles for phantoms and/or Kai Leng.
This is how extreme your argument has gotten. You are suggesting it doesn't really matter what Bioware can do, it is what they ought to do that matters. And what they ought to do will be decided by popular decision?
You see the pattern? Whether I respond to this new argument or not won't allow you to acknowledge the holes in your argument.
Do you... see a different dimension from most people? Who in their right mind has ever claimed Bioware is physically incapable of putting these weapons in their games? Look up every other thread discussing the inclusion of such weapons in the games. If anyone at any point has claimed Bioware actually cannot code melee weapons into their game for whatever reason (barring discussion on how effectively they do so), I will personally print those pages and eat them.
The pattern is quite clear yes. You're either going off the deep end, or you've been in there for some time. No offense. The discussion has always been should we get some melee weapons (or phrased as a request, can we have some melee weapons) and the counterargument has always been no we shouldn't because they're not viable without lore contrivances.
The reason I suggested not to make futurist arguments is because then you would have to do some research, if not it is 'what they ought to do?' which is just your opinion. No longer right or wrong, just words. We are not in a future with Mass Effect technology so you can comment on what is not possible as much as you want. The argument was can because that has an answer.
It is highly unlikely these weapons will appear in Andromeda but I doubt it is for any reason you have put forth.
I understand this is the internet but these arguments shouldn't be based on endurance. If we can't agree on this we should give up trying to.
Somehow I get the feeling my five seconds of googling crossbows has been more research than you've ever done on this topic. What they ought to do is an opinion yes, but one that is shared by quite a few people (not that that matters) and backed up by solid reasoning (this matters a great deal more) that you have yet to touch, other than jumping back and forth between "but bows exist!" and "it's the future!"
As this has proven a waste of time, now is indeed the time to bail on this pointless discussion. Have a nice day.
So now we move onto melee weapons. 
Remember you shaped this argument, you chose the topics.
Oh this is rich. You accuse me of moving the goalposts and then you write something like this. I ask or rather say "there should be lore that specifically makes this viable somehow" you reply with "ME is an alternate universe and bows exist today, and stuff so... yeah". Maybe I should be asking you how old you are, or better yet if you're just taking the ******.
The katanas in ME3 were given lore by the way. See "monomolecular blade" (may not have its own codex/wiki article but will be included in the articles for phantoms and/or Kai Leng.
Moving the goalposts is making a new argument once an old one is struck down. You saying, 'there should be lore specifically making this viable' in reference to bows and arrows, and the other weapon concepts, is countered by the idea that mayhaps the creators of the Mass Effect universe are human and so their fictional universe may be similar to ours, or at least have a history similar to ours. I may be wrong but Mass Effect doesn't mention the origin and evolution of life on earth but I am still going to assume it is Darwinian.
There is a problem with your reasoning here. Bows and arrows don't exist in ME as of yet so how can I point to the in-game lore if there is none? You don't have to 'win' this argument.
Either ask me how old I am or don't. Don't mention that you might. That is a weird thing to say.
Point out specifically where I said lore doesn't matter. Direct quotes only please.
I inferred that when you didn't respond to my point about Mass Effect like most fictional works have some basis in the real world. So you may not have said it was no longer about lore but you didn't respond to my point and quickly moved on. So I just made an assumption. Apologies if I am wrong but I do doubt that.
Do you... see a different dimension from most people? Who in their right mind has ever claimed Bioware is physically incapable of putting these weapons in their games? Look up every other thread discussing the inclusion of such weapons in the games. If anyone at any point has claimed Bioware actually cannot code melee weapons into their game for whatever reason (barring discussion on how effectively they do so), I will personally print those pages and eat them.
I am not even going to ask for a direct quote of that because I know I did not say it. I never claimed, that you claimed (what an argument technique:)) that Bioware is physically incapable of anything. I believe you think that Bioware adding these weapons to the game is somewhat similar to Bioware adding demons and angels to the game. I believe you think they are both equally unreasonable. When I made the point that Bioware 'can do it' I am simply saying it is not unreasonable.
The pattern is quite clear yes. You're either going off the deep end, or you've been in there for some time. No offense. The discussion has always been should we get some melee weapons (or phrased as a request, can we have some melee weapons) and the counterargument has always been no we shouldn't because they're not viable without lore contrivances.
Somehow I get the feeling my five seconds of googling crossbows has been more research than you've ever done on this topic. What they ought to do is an opinion yes, but one that is shared by quite a few people (not that that matters) and backed up by solid reasoning (this matters a great deal more) that you have yet to touch, other than jumping back and forth between "but bows exist!" and "it's the future!"
.. You specifically mentioned bows and arrows instead of daggers. Am I really being unfair to you? Or am I right? Have you changed the argument again to melee weapons when this argument was initially about lore. Don't be ashamed or anything. I wasn't trying to insult you. This is quite common. No one likes being wrong, me included, but when you are it would be nice if you could own up to it.
I am frustrated when we go from arguing 'how it is possible to add weapons to ME' to 'whether or not Bioware ought to' without acknowledging the difference.. you may have noticed my frustrations in the earlier post.
I think you missed my point (How many times have I told you that? ) about research.
As this has proven a waste of time, now is indeed the time to bail on this pointless discussion. Have a nice day.
Come on, you don't have to tell me you are not going to respond, just don't respond. It hardly matters, or does it? Aw, you have a nice day too.. Wait, why did it take you so long to wish me a nice day?
So, melee weapons, I think how it is implemented is important. I wouldn't want melee weapons as a primary weapon as I am pretty fond of how combat in ME works right now. However, remembering the melee bash I wouldn't mind if the same actions were taken but with daggers instead of a rifle or maybe the daggers were two parts of a gun or something. Something that is used close combat but without any sort of importance placed on it.
Retour en haut