146 réponses à ce sujet

[Keitaro57]

I don't care about EA or Bioware decisions. At all.

 

Your guys will be thrown in an unknown galaxy, unknown planet, unknown locations... And will only have to defend themselves ME2/ME3 weapons while in ME1 we see some people surviving since days against the Rachnis? In fact, with ammo limitation, if your team fall into an ambush, your survival is a matter of minutes while, with the low ME1 technology, you can take on waves after waves during a full week.

 

Why not use the two systems? Cooldowns weapons with low power but high durability and Thermal clips weapons with high punch but hard to obtain ammo?

 

Because, like other posters said, you will NOT find any thermal clips on the ground on unknown worlds! It is not about a personnal feeling about the gameplay or the possibilities to use microtransaction to make pay players. It is about the credibility of ME as a whole : They crushed a lot of the lore and I seriously hope they stop that!

[Catastrophy]

[...]
 

The overheating mechanic also encourages power use.

People who already make heavy use of powers would not be impacted.

People who like to shoot a lot would be unhappy, though some of them are also unhappy with the overheating mechanic. A mod that would install a permanent heat sink might satisfy some of them.

Don't know about encouraging power use, but I can definitely say that the e.g. Lancer, the Collector SMG don't have any bad impact on power use. The CSMG is in fact a popular "caster gun". There is the Prothean rifle I don't like for casters but this has more to do with the ramping up mechanic. It's fine when I go a shooty approach.
 

[Sylvius the Mad]

But here's the thing: Mass Effect is a shooter.

In which we can aim while paused, and even play without shooting anything.

ME3 did this really well, and there was so much ammo around that it didn't afftect gameplay really at all.

My concern about ammo, though, in MEA, is that I want it to make sense from a lore perspective.

[Synthetic Turian]

In which we can aim while paused, and even play without shooting anything.

ME3 did this really well, and there was so much ammo around that it didn't afftect gameplay really at all.

My concern about ammo, though, in MEA, is that I want it to make sense from a lore perspective.

 

You're going to be disappointed, and so will I.

 

It will be Mass Effect 3 version 2.5

[Sylvius the Mad]

Why not use the two systems? Cooldowns weapons with low power but high durability and Thermal clips weapons with high punch but hard to obtain ammo?

This would effectively eliminate no-clip sniper rifles.

I like sniper rifles. I'd rather have a rifle with a long cooldown than one that needed ammo.

[Sylvius the Mad]

You're going to be disappointed, and so will I.

And if we raise the issue enough and make it broadly visible, so will a great many other people.

If we move the margins of public opinion, EA's tendency to pursue the median gamer will cause them to move in our direction.

[Synthetic Turian]

And if we raise the issue enough and make it broadly visible, so will a great many other people.

If we move the margins of public opinion, EA's tendency to pursue the median gamer will cause them to move in our direction.

 

Well, the extended cut, did happen due to fan base outrage. So, yeah, you have a point there Mr. Sy. 

 

However, I doubt many of the Mass Effect community actually care about clips (as much as we do).

 

They're more concerned with character sexual preferences and romances.

[KaiserShep]

Well, the extended cut, did happen due to fan base outrage. So, yeah, you have a point there Mr. Sy. 

 

However, I doubt many of the Mass Effect community actually care about clips (as much as we do).

 

They're more concerned with character sexual preferences and romances.

 

Well, it's like Bill Clinton said:

 

[Pasquale1234]

._.

Ashley?

Ashley maintained the armory in ME1, Jacob in ME2, and Vega and Cortez shared that duty in ME3.
 

Also, you can't really prepare when playing Unknown maps with Uknown enemies.. optimally prepare, I mean. ... In this case, I doubt the map challange can be balanced properly.

It's an issue in your first playthrough (and anytime you aren't metagaming), and it can certainly affect your squad selection. Ammo management could make it even more complicated.

ME3 was relatively simple - if the name of a mission started with Cerberus, you'd likely be dealing with shields, engineers, and an occasional barrier; otherwise you'd be facing more barriers, armors and an occasional shield with reaper enemies. No idea what we'll be facing in Andromeda.
 

That's a no-brainer. What's the point of the Claymore, when I have to switch to my club after 18 shots on an extensive land survey? A Thresher Maw easily eats all the heat clips.

That reminds me - one of the reasons that I hated running out of ammo in ME2 is that there was no role-play reason for it (aside from Shepard being an idiot), and no role-play reason to quit using the optimal weapon in the middle of the battle and switch to another.
 

Your guys will be thrown in an unknown galaxy, unknown planet, unknown locations... And will only have to defend themselves ME2/ME3 weapons while in ME1 we see some people surviving since days against the Rachnis? In fact, with ammo limitation, if your team fall into an ambush, your survival is a matter of minutes while, with the low ME1 technology, you can take on waves after waves during a full week.

That's another issue I have with restricting ammo - it would also restrict level and encounter design. If ammo restrictions are a consideration in encounter design, the encounters would all need to be winnable with the same base ammo restrictions, which leads to less variety in them.

[ViSeiRa]

This always bothered me, especially in ME2.

If I ran out of clips, and there weren't any more around, I could just wait behind cover and my squadmates would somehow fire hundreds of shots until the enemies were dead.

 

Unless the AI algorithms controlling your squadmates have human-level machine intelligence I don't think micromanaging your squadmate's thermal clips is gonna work.. ask anyone who played Resident Evil 5 without Co-op (it wasn't impossible, just annoying as hell).

 

That said, death to thermal clips... they are a poor excuse for catering to COD players.

[Synthetic Turian]

Well, it's like Bill Clinton said:

 

 

Seems whiny. But 100% justifiable due to my money spent. So, yes.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Unless the AI algorithms controlling your squadmates have human-level machine intelligence I don't think micromanaging your squadmate's thermal clips is gonna work.. ask anyone who played Resident Evil 5 without Co-op (it wasn't impossible, just annoying as hell).

That said, death to thermal clips... they are a poor excuse for catering to COD players.

I wasn't suggesting we have to manage them, just that they should exist. There should be some limit to how much ammo the squadmates can carry, and sometimes they should run out.

[RoboticWater]

ME does allow active ammo load management on the field, via skills.

ME1 used mods for that - and you could swap them in the field, too.

When I say active management, I don't mean actively doing things in a menu; I mean actively making decisions in the midst of shooting.
 
Worrying about how much medigel you should use and when or which part of an enemy you should shoot is active management.
 

I don't want to be "encouraged" to play any particular way, at least not when the method involves "punishing" me for trying to play in a way that best satisfies my preferences.

As I have said so many times: others want to be encouraged. I'm not trying to find a system that perfectly satisfies you, I'm trying to find a system that achieves the best result overall. Incidentally, that means making most people somewhat or mostly happy rather than just making only some people completely happy.
 
Besides, this is what difficulty sliders are for. If you don't want the ammo system to affect your playstyle, tone down the difficulty.
 

Unless you adjusted quantities by vocation, ammo scarcity would punish some vocations more than others. You'd also need to be more meticulous in balancing weapon designs, and ostensibly more forthcoming about weapon stats.

I don't see what the problem is. Of course an unbalanced system would be unfair for certain classes.
 
I want BIoWare to be more meticulous with weapon design. Weapon design is paramount.
 

The ideal being... ?

What I just described a few sentences up in that post.
 

In FO3, ammo is weightless. You can carry all that you possess.

What Fallout 3 does is irrelevant; Mass Effect isn't Fallout. I only referenced it because it has ammunition types.
 

So I've been told. It was initially marketed as an action RPG.

Fallout is also an RPG that happens to use shooting mechanics.

This argument is becoming increasingly untenable. I understand that you don't come to Mass Effect for the shooting, but pretending that Mass Effect isn't a shooter or holding onto outdated marketing material and then proclaiming that Mass Effect has long since gone astray is absurd. Mass Effect isn't an RPG that "just so happens to use shooting mechanics." It hasn't been for a while and it arguably never was. I simply do not care if you think that's a bad thing.

What I do care about are good discussions that could actually benefit BioWare if they read them. Arguing on the basis that Mass Effect's TPS mechanics shouldn't exist or shouldn't be cared for isn't helpful to anyone, because BioWare clearly values those TPS elements. Calling BioWare's design decisions wrong especially after they've proven to be so effective is useless. I think the best way to get what we want is to work with BioWare's decisions and creative direction to create something that appeals to both TPS and RPG fans alike while respecting BioWare's creative control.
 

I think level, encounter, and enemy AI design have far greater potential to keep combat (whether you choose to shoot or not) consistently engaging.

And they do, but that's no reason to deny more enhancements. Good shooter mechanics are a confluence of major and minor design facets that flow together and improve on each other. Wolfenstien, Shadow Warrior, and Dead Space would all be worse games without their ammunition systems, so would countless other shooters. This extra system really does have tangible beneficial effects.
 

From the inception of the IP, ME weapons have had a very different technological basis than any other firearms. Adding ammo now would be a sea change in the technology, and change the flavor of the series.

I'll grant you this. It is true that ammo doesn't make a whole lot of sense in context of the lore. Of course, that's never stopped BIoWare before. They could say that weapon types now have to use their own proprietary sinks or something. I'm not saying that's a good explanation but for me, it'd be worth it the mechanical benefit.
 
We're also going to a new galaxy, so there's potentially a bit more room for an ammo system there.
 

Also - I genuinely think the overheating mechanic is as good as it gets. It restricts how much you can shoot over time, which I find preferable to a cap on how much you can shoot, period.

But how do you think that improves the game's mechanics? How does restricting "how much you can shoot over time," make the game better? And how can you be so confident when you haven't played any of the shooters I've referenced?

I found ME1's gunplay to be slow, due in no small part to gun cooldown periods, and I'm sure others would say the same.
 

It doesn't serve as a vector of difficulty when all you need to do is camp in cover and wait for your squadmates to finish the battle. It just means players are camping in cover instead of playing. In order for some limitation to be meaningful, it needs to be applied to all allied combatants.

This has always been a problem, even with overheat. How would an ammo system make this worse?
 
But fine, we can have squad ammunition management if you think it's absolutely necessary. That just means more to do in the inventory screen right?

[RoboticWater]

The overheating mechanic also encourages power use.

How? I've gone to great pains to describe exactly why I think ammunition promotes power usage, you could at least do me the same courtesy. 
 

People who already make heavy use of powers would not be impacted.

Good. That's the point. Powers are fun and generally strategic, so adding in a system that encourages and doesn't limit their use is the goal.
 

People who like to shoot a lot would be unhappy, though some of them are also unhappy with the overheating mechanic. A mod that would install a permanent heat sink might satisfy some of them.

People who like to shoot a lot are presumably the kind of people who like shooters, and shooter fans would probably enjoy systems that are taken from their favorite games.
 
Besides, people who like to shoot a lot should be able to customize their character and spec into powers that facilitate shooting and decrease ammo consumption (or increase ammo reserves).

[Silcron]

Speaking of Battlefront, we could have a mixture of the two. Since technology will have gone forward we could fuse both systems to do something akin to battlefront (which has the cooldown system mixed with Gears of War reactive reload).

Meaning, we could get a bit of lore explaining that now the pouch/belt/whatever that houses the thermal clips cools them down too, so, you have a limited amount of thermal clips but instead of throwing them away you just swap them around. The other option being letting the weapon cool down on its own.

Mechanically? It could work exactly like Battlefront. Except you also have an ammo count that gets lowered if you swap clips and slowly comes back up on its own as your, let's say belt, cools them down.

I think it could work as "best of both worlds" since the point is that both mechanics implemented a sort of resource management into the game. Either watch weapon heating or ammo count, the only big difference is that instead of scavenging around for ammo you'd wait for the clips to cool down in both your weapon and your reserves. In the meanting you still have your powers and ordering squad members around, so it's not like you'd have to sit idly.

[Sidney]

Overheating sucks as a mechanism. From a purely practical matter it is a junk way to fight - no one who has been in combat wants their weapon to become inoperable for using the wrong fire discipline. Worse, overheating might give you staying power but short of a siege scenario most fire fights don't last long enough you should be concerned about that. I want to win quick and when I have to fire in a particular way well that isn't good. Finally, in ME1 overheating was a joke because a few mods and the mechanism went away and it was pray and spray time. It also made no lore sense, weren't the metal shards in a mass effect field? So why did they generate friction and why does a single shot from a sniper rifle create more friction than an SMG? Real world only high ROF weapons have heat related issues - MGs will swap barrels when they are sustaining a high rate of fire. Yeah the thermal clips make no sense really but the whole mechanism is awful and they'd have been better off with bullets from the word go.

[Mirrman70]

This would effectively eliminate no-clip sniper rifles.

I like sniper rifles. I'd rather have a rifle with a long cooldown than one that needed ammo.

 

what if we get at least one of every class of weapon. they can be the ones we start with before we are able to set up settlements and bases. once we do that and we have more resources available we should be able to make more powerful weapons that operate on thermal clips. that way we get lore justification as well as make both sides of this argument happy.

[Calinstel]

Overheating sucks as a mechanism. From a purely practical matter it is a junk way to fight - no one who has been in combat wants their weapon to become inoperable for using the wrong fire discipline. Worse, overheating might give you staying power but short of a siege scenario most fire fights don't last long enough you should be concerned about that. I want to win quick and when I have to fire in a particular way well that isn't good. Finally, in ME1 overheating was a joke because a few mods and the mechanism went away and it was pray and spray time. It also made no lore sense, weren't the metal shards in a mass effect field? So why did they generate friction and why does a single shot from a sniper rifle create more friction than an SMG? Real world only high ROF weapons have heat related issues - MGs will swap barrels when they are sustaining a high rate of fire. Yeah the thermal clips make no sense really but the whole mechanism is awful and they'd have been better off with bullets from the word go.

To clarify, as best I can, the heat created by the weapons is not due to friction (which makes the frictionless material mods silly).  The heat is created by the electronics of the gun itself and what it is firing.  Creating high Tesla/Gauss fields then collapsing the field as the next field pulls the projectile to it, causes heat.  The stronger the field, the more heat produced.  (Very VERY simple explanation so sorry if it sounds off). 

The sniper rifle produced much more heat because the field strengths as well as the projectile were larger, or there were more coils for accuracy in the weapon.

 

Though I much prefer the weapons ME1, and they make more sense to me in the ME universe, I also understand the need for some type of limitations on weapons.  What I posted above though is neither for nor against either method of heat control and is just here to maybe? hopefully? explain where the heat comes from.

[N7Jamaican]

I am playing ME1 on my XB1, and I tell you. The cooldowns on the weapons.. I freaking HATE it. Firing like 3-4 shots (using a pistol currently -- just started.) then wait an absurd amount of time for it to cool down is a pain in the ass.

[Synthetic Turian]

I am playing ME1 on my XB1, and I tell you. The cooldowns on the weapons.. I freaking HATE it. Firing like 3-4 shots (using a pistol currently -- just started.) then wait an absurd amount of time for it to cool down is a pain in the ass.

 

 

On topic, bring back these: 

 

[Keitaro57]

ME suffers from the CallofDirty pressure.

 

Ammo clips are good for CoD, so MEU must use them.

Knives are overpowered in CoD so Omniblade became able to slash through heavy plates of armor.

Grenades have an arc of throw in CoD so grenades must not fly directly to the target, stay glued at it and detonate in MEU.

Medigel make recover slowly the health in ME1 but in CoD it is almost instantly back just by breathing fresh air, so it must be the same in ME2.

 

 

So what's next? CoD don't need a solo game so MEU will throw it out the window?

 

I smell less and less SF here and more and more gun powder.

[Synthetic Turian]

One day, all Mass Effect games will always be online.

 

That being said, campaigns will be shorter and more emphasis will be placed into multiplayer.

 

Mark my words.

[Keitaro57]

One day, all Mass Effect games will always be online.

 

That being said, campaigns will be shorter and more emphasis will be placed into multiplayer.

 

Mark my words.

Don't need to be Nostradamus to know that.

Online+multiplayer = Microtransactions.

EA want money. More money. More! Even Mr Burnes is a Saint in front of them...

[Synthetic Turian]

Don't need to be Nostradamus to know that.

Online+multiplayer = Microtransactions.

EA want money. More money. More! Even Mr Burnes is a Saint in front of them...

 

Yep.

 

Start up screen: Press any button to continue > Campaign > Loading... > Please login to you Origin account >

 

*Refuses to login*

 

"Sorry, this feature in unavailable until you login to Origin. We apologize for any inconvenience."

 

Offline login: Press any button to continue > Campaign > Loading... > Please connect to the internet.

 

*Cancel*

 

"Connection error. Please assure that your platform is connected to the internet."

 

[Sylvius the Mad]

One day, all Mass Effect games will always be online.

That being said, campaigns will be shorter and more emphasis will be placed into multiplayer.

Mark my words.

I'm already barely interested in playing. It wouldn't take much to make me walk away.

Single-player games will continue to exist (particularly on PC). I'm not worried about that.