They don't need to be equivalent. Everything doesn't all need to add up to the same number.That's subjective, I find the idea that all weapons should be on same technological level unrealistic.
I very much wouldn't mind starting with the Predator I. Don't care about the Avenger, but the Predator was always a great gun, ME3 Predator for example had nearly the same DPS as the Carnifex, with it's only disadvantage that it was bad against armored targets due to the low damage per shot and armor damage migitation, something which could be easily alleviated by using the piercing mod.
Plus, you didn't face many enemies with armor at the start of the game, so its one distinct disadvantage never really had much of an impact.
Shepard could wield the Claymore too.
Not Grunt's Heavy Claymore in ME2... which is what I was referring to.
But that's exactly the issue -- people who make that complaint think that the way the trilogy handled gear was stupid, so saying that ME1 did it that way isn't a selling point.I agree, I don't understand why people think that the gear given by the Alliance should be or would be top of the line or the best gear in the games, even though in ME1 and the later games they weren't.
My bad.I did read the codex post, but Shepard's version can be wielded by himself.
Grunt's Heavy Claymore?
THE Claymore, sure. GRUNTS Claymore however would snap him like a very, very thin twig. Also ninja'd ⏫.Shepard could wield the Claymore too.
Why did you even bring up grunt's Claymore when we can't even kill him? It would fall under one of the weapons that need extra requirements like being a Krogan. I already covered this.Not Grunt's Heavy Claymore in ME2... which is what I was referring to.
But that's exactly the issue -- people who make that complaint think that the way the trilogy handled gear was stupid, so saying that ME1 did it that way isn't a selling point.
Why did you even bring up grunt's Claymore when we can't even kill him? It would fall under one of the weapons that need extra requirements like being a Krogan. I already covered this.
If you found a dead Korgan and looted his Claymore would you know if it was a human-usable Claymore or a Krogan-only Claymore? Would you risk shooting it to find out?
The point being that we know nothing about any of the races in Andromeda really every weapon might fall under your extra requirements category.
I said all the games did it. The alliance has never had the most advanced technology in the universe, why would an alliance soldier have the best gear in the game anyway? Kassa fabrications make the best armor, they're not owned by the alliance.
Ok, so I agree that starting with crappy weapons never made much sense in ME before. The way the story was set up, Shep should have had access to decent equipment in all 3 games, either right from the start or at least after the tutorials.
That said, it all depends on how the game starts. Maybe we'll start without weapons at all. Maybe we'll not be part of the military. Who knows what kinds of ship we'll get this time. Maybe it's something that we'll have to salvage, so there is no/only old equipment there. In the end, RPGs are always about progressing your character not only in terms of their abilities but also their equipment. And making a bunch of weapons the stats of which are below the starting equipment is completely useless.
So I don't think we should start with middle class equipment but it would be nice if there was a reason why we don't have anything better.
The M8 Avenger is a pretty badass looking gun to me.
Ok, so I agree that starting with crappy weapons never made much sense in ME before. The way the story was set up, Shep should have had access to decent equipment in all 3 games, either right from the start or at least after the tutorials.
That said, it all depends on how the game starts. Maybe we'll start without weapons at all. Maybe we'll not be part of the military. Who knows what kinds of ship we'll get this time. Maybe it's something that we'll have to salvage, so there is no/only old equipment there. In the end, RPGs are always about progressing your character not only in terms of their abilities but also their equipment. And making a bunch of weapons the stats of which are below the starting equipment is completely useless.
So I don't think we should start with middle class equipment but it would be nice if there was a reason why we don't have anything better.
If you found a dead Korgan and looted his Claymore would you know if it was a human-usable Claymore or a Krogan-only Claymore? Would you risk shooting it to find out?
The point being that we know nothing about any of the races in Andromeda really every weapon might fall under your extra requirements category.
There's this thing called requirements, there's a reason why rpg's have things like you need X strength to use a sword or X amount of skill to use a spell because it will definitely be too heavy for Shepard or a human being to use.
Note that RPGs aren't always about gear progression, at least not PnP ones. A lot of the SF and modern ones work like Traveller, where the real question isn't whether you've been able to get your hands on military-grade gear, but whether you'll be able to use it on the current mission, given legal constraints and whatnot. And many such games tend to have very flat power curves -- the last pistol you get just isn't going to be all that much better than the first one
Right, I agree. I think it's not that important in PnP RPGs because there, you have so much freedom that you can make your game more about character interactions, dialogue and really playing a character as such, which can be extremely rewarding.
Video games are much more constrained in hat regard because it isn't something you can program with the same degree of freedom for the player. So what you need is a programmable and thus ultimately repetitive game mechanic which still generates a rewarding experience. Fight & loot progressively better gear is probably the most effective way to do this.
Are there any video game RPGs out there that don't have gear progression? I've been trying to think of one but nothing comes to mind.
Having a predator I and weak enemies for start is anything but fun. I rather fight stronger enemies and stronger guns from the start. That's much more fun.
I can think lots of other options what makes a game an RPG. Just because we start with the shittiest weapons and level 1 every time wont make it RPG.
This is all a matter of perspective surely, either the enemies do not progress in strength or they do. If they do then any weapons you bring to the fight will need to be upgraded and so in comparison it would appear you came with weak weapons no matter what they did. You could start the game with the best weapons from ME 3 and if the forces your fighting are growing in strength then it will still appear as if in comparison your guns where pieces of tat.
On the other hand if they stay at a flat level of difficulty so you do not upgrade your weapons or skills then well.... is it a RPG any more?
The M8 Avenger is a pretty badass looking gun to me.
A shame they removed all the scopes from the Vindicator and Avenger in ME3 in order to make room for the ugly scope modifications. It was especially bad on the Vindicator since you could still see where the old scope was.
As for the original topic. I didn't actually find the Avenger in ME3 SP bad. It was a reasonable weapon with no real downside considering the weight.
are you asking me?
Not particularly.
Ammo preservation? Make it so they choose to use weaker items with more prevalent ammo and save up the bigger guns for heftier missions.
I don't see how this makes any sense or even answers my question. Making someone do something is incompatible with them making a "choice," and I don't see how ammunition would be an issue unless you were given a fixed, limited amount for the whole game (which would probably cause riots, so I think we can safely say that won't happen.)
Mod specialization? Allow the ability to modify weapons to use situationally,
Again, I don't see how this even answers my question. Mod specialization could exist or not exist independently of what weapons we start with.
A shame they removed all the scopes from the Vindicator and Avenger in ME3 in order to make room for the ugly scope modifications. It was especially bad on the Vindicator since you could still see where the old scope was.
As for the original topic. I didn't actually find the Avenger in ME3 SP bad. It was a reasonable weapon with no real downside considering the weight.
They were also confused about where the barrel actually is on most of the ARs.
I could very well imagine something where different classes start with slightly different equipment as well.
For example, a soldier may already have the choice between 2 assault rifles, while an engineer just gets a pistol but maybe one or two mods instead. A sentinel may have better armor and one extra medigel upgrade while a vanguard gets s shotgun (obviously 
), etc..
Might help t make the classes feel a little more distinctive from the get-go.
I could very well imagine something where different classes start with slightly different equipment as well.
For example, a soldier may already have the choice between 2 assault rifles, while an engineer just gets a pistol but maybe one or two mods instead. A sentinel may have better armor and a one extra medigel upgrade while a vanguard gets s shotgun (obviously
Might help t make the classes feel a little more distinctive from the get-go.
I wouldn't be surprised if somebody complained that limited their gameplay. I would not be opposed to something like this.
Power classes should have to give up something to access more or better weapons. Otherwise it is just a "have your cake and eat it too" situation.
This presupposes that the powers are decent, but honestly there were a lot more examples of good to amazing powers than there were bad ones in the trilogy.
There's this thing called requirements, there's a reason why rpg's have things like you need X strength to use a sword or X amount of skill to use a spell because it will definitely be too heavy for Shepard or a human being to use.
Still slightly missing my point ... most RPGs are swords and sorcery affairs; loot a warhammer and you can be pretty sure you hold the end with grip and smack the bad guys with the big heavy end. You might not be very proficient with it, hell you might not even be strong enough to lift it comfortably if it's a big enough warhammer. You're certainly not gonna lug it around in your backpack if that's the case.
Mass Effect is, obviously, a Sci-Fi RPG. You kill a space monster and pick its gun up... you might not even be able to work out which end the blast comes out of let alone what any of those weird symbols mean. That's if the alien is even suitably humanoid enough for you to use it even if you could work out how. It's not a matter of a requirement of your Str or Dex stat but simply that you've just picked up some completely alien high-tech weapon and you have absolutely no idea how it works... or what will happen if you do figure out the trigger.
A Krogan Heavy Claymore looks pretty much like a regular Claymore - the tech isn't that alien (developed by the Alliance after all) - you may think, "hey, this is a Claymore, I can shoot this!", you may well be physically able to pick it up and fire it but you'll need a squadmate to glue your arms back on afterwards. That's with tech you do understand.
Far safer to just scan it and send the data to the techs to work out. Even if it's not something that can be wielded by a human it could be perhaps mounted on a bot or given to a Krogan... it could still be useful, just not directly to the PC.
Right, and all the games handled it badly.
Shepard isn't just some random soldier. Depending on the timeframe, he's either on the most advanced warship in the Alliance, a Spectre, leading a hugely important and expensive Cerberus mission, or leading the most important mission in the history of the Alliance.
Breaking it down:
1: Normandy doesn't even have the best Alliance gear. It's tolerable for a top-of-the-line Alliance ship to be worse than crap you can buy off-the-shelf, though it implies the Alliance is a very poorly-managed organization. 120 billion credits for the drive core, a few hundred for weapons and armor? Dopey, but tolerable. But Normandy doesn't even have the best stuff from the Alliance manufacturers.
2: Spectre. OK, this is just stupid lore. Self-financing agents who are above the law? I don't see how you could devise a more corrupt system.
3: Cerberus. So... TIM can't cough up a little more cash for the best stuff in the Citadel, Ilium, and Omega markets? I'll give Tuchanka a pass because, hey, who knew there was anything of worth there. Hell, Normandy doesn't even have the best Cerberus equipment; remember the upgrades from the Reaper IFF mission?
4: ME3: No excuses. Normandy's on the most important mission there is. They have months to get gear to the ship, or at least to issue Shepard an expense account. Instead, they trickle in a few credits after each mission.
ME1 would be more excusable because all the top of the line Alliance gear in that game was just mid tier.
Can't find an excuse for the rest but the Council told you as a spectre that you'll have to fend for yourself.
The idea that we send the last home of organic civilization off to the far reaches of the galaxy and give them the hand-me downs is silly. As other have said, none of that stuff makes sense in the ME world in any of the games. I always loved in 1 that I was a SPECTRE but not able to use SPECTRE weapons.
I'd have no problem if at level 1 we had access to all the guns and all the mods. Unlike in DA none of the guns was anything like the Sword of Super Killington type thing. They had strengths and weaknesses and so the reason why the Mattock is gained earlier than the Harrier makes no sense.
Ye-es but against the things we may come up against in a new galaxy there's no guarantee that a Black Widow X or Harrier X is going to be particularly effective - you might start with the absolute best, most cutting edge tech the Milky Way had to offer and yet when you get to Andromeda you find it's barely better than a butter knife.
So, you need to upgrade your gear again and the standard RPG weapons upgrade path is preserved.
You shouldn't be able to use end or even mid game gear right away. How does it improve gameplay to have everything available when you start? There isn't a need to justify this with narrative or lore, it is a simple gameplay issue.
From a lore or story perspective, I don't think its fair to compare scifi and fantasy weapon progression.
With mass production, any N7 or Spectre should be equipped with the best weapons of the Alliance and the Council. Also, the powerful weapons in fantasy games generally have some sort of magical element, which wouldn't work in Mass Effect.
If we have weapon progression (and from a gameplay perspective, I hope we do!) I'd like to start with the best technology the Milky Way has to offer, and only upgrade with the alien improvements we come across in Andromeda.
Retour en haut