289 réponses à ce sujet

[SolNebula]

Let's see if you remove cover:

 

1) enemies will become bullet sponges

 

2) killing bullet sponges is not fun and neither realistic

 

or

 

1) If enemies die normally

 

2) then to compensate they will keep running around the level like crazy chickens to make targeting them difficult

 

3) this too is not fun and neither realistic

 

MP style running and gunning is the most stupid and irrealistic type of shooting mechanic...if you do that in a real battlefield you will be dead in a second....but you won't respawn.

 

Therefore cover-based shooter is the best thing we have at the moment.

[OdanUrr]

I like hard cover. I don't really use it much (like, at all, actually) when playing MP but it can be handy at times. Regardless, combat can still be fluid with hard cover, it depends on the players really.

[Guanxii]

You don't have to use it if you don't want to, just take energy drain as a bonus power or play soldier or vanguard problem solved.

[KirkyX]

Let's see if you remove cover:
 
1) enemies will become bullet sponges
 
2) killing bullet sponges is not fun and neither realistic
 
or
 
1) If enemies die normally
 
2) then to compensate they will keep running around the level like crazy chickens to make targeting them difficult
 
3) this too is not fun and neither realistic
 
MP style running and gunning is the most stupid and irrealistic type of shooting mechanic...if you do that in a real battlefield you will be dead in a second....but you won't respawn.
 
Therefore cover-based shooter is the best thing we have at the moment.

You seem to be conflating 'realistic' - in so far as anything can be 'realistic' in a game with interstellar starships that defy the laws of physics, enough humanoid aliens to fill half a season of Star Trek, and body armour with regenerating energy shields (amongst a great, great many other things) - with 'good'.

Now, I'm not against the cover-based shooting, even if there are other styles of gameplay that I prefer, but BioWare could use the technology of the Mass Effect setting to justify more or less whatever kind of gameplay they wanted. They could introduce kinetic barriers so perfect that guns become completely useless, so everyone has to go back to using space swords - think the slow knife in Dune/the Goa'uld personal energy shields in Stargate - or whatever. They could have some new mecha gods descend and declare that all future conflict be solved through playing children's card games on motorcycles. They could give us all super strong genetically engineered pets that do all the fighting for us.

That's all a bit much, of course, and I'm not suggesting they do anything of the sort. What I am saying, is that whether a given style of gameplay is 'realistic' in the context of non-fictional 21st century Erf military tactics really doesn't come into it. What matters is whether it's fun. Which cover-based shooting certainly can be!

[sjsharp2011]

I'm new to playing these kinds of games, and appreciate using cover for protection. I'm not a run-and-gun player and do not want to be exposed to fire anymore than necessary. I really don't understand your point of 'removing the cover mechanic all together." This makes no sense - it is an absurd suggestion, it seems to me.

People come from a variety of experiences, inexperience, and preferences to play shooting-type games. Why would any rpg expect all players to operate with no cover system? Why should anything be 'one-way' only? Cover or no-cover?

I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt and assume that the OP is asking for a discussion about cover systems. Of note, mickey111 started a thread about the cover system back on June 24th, 2015, but with only 6 replies. I'm interested in learning about cover systems and hope others will be informative on this topic.

 

Why not make some 'no-cover' MP missions available for the really hardcore gamers to enjoy?

Yeah I agree I can see it working well for people on multiplayer to have maps hat have no or very few cover points. But with single player I don't see it working. TBH I see  ME as an RPG first a shooter second and even most of the games that are shooters like COD do have an element of cover mechanics even if they are handled differently. Personally when it comes to combat I think ME should just keep doing what it has been doing and I hope that it does

[Obliviousmiss]

I love cover.....cover helps me not die. 

 

*looks at MEA forum topics*

 

-Remove cover based shooting

-Paragon / Renegade outdated? 

-Omni Tool pause menu

 

I still think that the majority of this forum wants a Mass Effect game, but a game that's not Mass Effect. It's so bizarre. 

[Onewomanarmy]

I love cover.....cover helps me not die. 

 

*looks at MEA forum topics*

 

-Remove cover based shooting

-Paragon / Renegade outdated? 

-Omni Tool pause menu

 

I still think that the majority of this forum wants a Mass Effect game, but a game that's not Mass Effect. It's so bizarre. 

 

I think everyone is desperate for news on MEA, that's what's wrong lol. But the game won't be out until next year, so I doubt we'll get anything anytime soon. 

[Cyonan]

I love cover.....cover helps me not die. 

 

*looks at MEA forum topics*

 

-Remove cover based shooting

-Paragon / Renegade outdated? 

-Omni Tool pause menu

 

I still think that the majority of this forum wants a Mass Effect game, but a game that's not Mass Effect. It's so bizarre. 

 

Embrace the ways of the Vanguard.

 

There is no cover. There is only Nova spam.

 

Although I don't think they need to shake up their core gameplay mechanics all that much anymore. They spent 3 games getting it to a place where it could stand up on its own without being carried by story and dialogue. There's no need to throw that away now.

[sjsharp2011]

I love cover.....cover helps me not die. 

 

*looks at MEA forum topics*

 

-Remove cover based shooting

-Paragon / Renegade outdated? 

-Omni Tool pause menu

 

I still think that the majority of this forum wants a Mass Effect game, but a game that's not Mass Effect. It's so bizarre. 

A little too bizarre if you ask me

[sjsharp2011]

Embrace the ways of the Vanguard.

 

There is no cover. There is only Nova spam.

 

Although I don't think they need to shake up their core gameplay mechanics all that much anymore. They spent 3 games getting it to a place where it could stand up on its own without being carried by story and dialogue. There's no need to throw that away now.

I agree I don't think Bioware need to change thimngs too much. If they want to experiment by giving us 1 or 2 new powers or something then fair enough but mechanically I'd keep it more or less the same. 

[Obliviousmiss]

I think everyone is desperate for news on MEA, that's what's wrong lol. But the game won't be out until next year, so I doubt we'll get anything anytime soon. 

 

Always quick to help me see reason. You're such a sweetheart. 

 

 

 

 

Although I don't think they need to shake up their core gameplay mechanics all that much anymore. They spent 3 games getting it to a place where it could stand up on its own without being carried by story and dialogue. There's no need to throw that away now.

 

Right? It's what makes Mass Effect what it is, they've found out what works and what doesn't after 3 games if you think....but there's always room for improvement and fun additions, but they'll stay true to their core gameplay. 

 

 

I agree I don't think Bioware need to change thimngs too much. If they want to experiment by giving us 1 or 2 new powers or something then fair enough but mechanically I'd keep it more or less the same. 

 

Word.

 

 

A little too bizarre if you ask me

 

These forums are starting to look like the 5th circle of hell with all the craziness I'm seeing. And it's the lack of MEA info that's doing it!

[Walker White]

You can have a 3rd person cover shooter with soft cover.  This is exactly what Quantum Break does.  However, I definitely do not want ME3 to play like Quantum Break (for many reasons).

 

Since QB does not lock to cover, it does not allow peeking. To get any strategic power usage, you have to be flanking the enemies at all times.  This means that the game forces a high mobility Vanguard-style playthrough.  Slow and tactical adept and engineer playthroughs are very hard to do without peeking.  I know peeking with soft cover is possible (Dishonored does that), but I am still skeptical how well this would work with ME3 powers and squad control.

 

Honestly, the main problem with ME3 cover is that sprint and lock-to-cover are the same button.  This is why you find yourself locking to cover that you do not want.  If you made these different buttons, you would solve most of the problems with the system.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I fully support this suggestion. Anything that makes combat more free-form and a less tightly controlled experience is a step in the right direction.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Let's see if you remove cover:

1) enemies will become bullet sponges

2) killing bullet sponges is not fun and neither realistic

or

1) If enemies die normally

2) then to compensate they will keep running around the level like crazy chickens to make targeting them difficult

3) this too is not fun and neither realistic

MP style running and gunning is the most stupid and irrealistic type of shooting mechanic...if you do that in a real battlefield you will be dead in a second....but you won't respawn.

Therefore cover-based shooter is the best thing we have at the moment.

You missed one possible solution.

Symmetrical mechanics. If the players' characters are as fragile as enemies are, that will encourage a much more risk-averse approach to combat. Then they can still remove hard cover, because we'll be creeping into the combat zone anyway. No running & gunning there.

[Degenerate Rakia Time]

i say remove the shooting, MEA should be a kinect dance game

[Cyonan]

I fully support this suggestion. Anything that makes combat more free-form and a less tightly controlled experience is a step in the right direction.

 

All you have to do to get the combat the OP is describing in ME3 is to literally just... not go into hard cover. It is 100% not required to beat the game, as any class and on any difficulty.

 

Supporting this is like me saying pause to aim should be removed because I don't want to play that way.

[Valhallix]

I'm a Vanguard who has his buddy Kaidan group reave a crowd before he charges and novas them to hell. What is this cover you speak of? Actually you don't even have to play on insanity to beat it. Just choose Kaidan & James as squadmates and equip them with the Typhoon or that one rifle that pushes people back. They never get downed by anything short of direct constant shots from turrets or getting punched more than 3 times by a mech.

 

I know because i've sent both James and Kaidan to their deaths. Infront of brutes, in the middle of 8 cerberus troops. They're tanky as hell. Meanwhile I get a few shots from one dude, barrier destroyed, inch of health left lol. Priority Eden Prime, I sent Kaidan in the middle of all the cerberus troops (when you're defending the pod) he would not go down. Meanwhile Liara, over here in cover goes down in the first seconds of combat.

[RoboticWater]

You missed one possible solution.

Symmetrical mechanics. If the players' characters are as fragile as enemies are, that will encourage a much more risk-averse approach to combat. Then they can still remove hard cover, because we'll be creeping into the combat zone anyway. No running & gunning there.

If we don't have cover or an excess of health, then we likely won't be moving at all. Most people would probably find the first bit of reliable cover and stick there playing whack-a-mole for a while. Hard cover, on the other hand, guarantees relatively safe movement across the battlefield regardless of our health status.

 

We want to encourage (or at least ensure) movement for all classes. Tankier classes can always run around ignoring cover as they please, but squishier classes shouldn't be hamstrung. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Weapon balance is less important in cooperative games, I think. I don't mind an OP (but not too much) gun if it's fun to use.

 

And yeah, ME3's usage of cover was good. Useful in a tight spot, but you have enough mobility and defensive options to play without it (unlike, say, ME2 which played like whack-a-mole).

Weapon balance is also anathema to an RPG, where weapon progression is key to a sense of advancement. No one wants a truly balanced system where the first weapon you pick up is as good/balanced against end-tier weapons.

 

For MP purposes there should be balanced tiers- but I don't think absolute weapon balance is even desirable.

[ExoGeniVI]

What I was saying is that with the large open worlds we'll be roaming, the whack-a-mole gameplay style of ME1-3 will make gameplay virtually impossible, just look at Mass Effect 1... You couldn't attack a pirate base without the supporting fire of your Mako. We need faster paced gameplay and to be able to call in 'Mac Strikes' (Halo Wars) For support when on large open alien worlds so we can at least have a chance on foot.

[Walker White]

You couldn't attack a pirate base without the supporting fire of your Mako. 

 

 

We are talking about ME1?  A game where singularity could take out an entire room, right?  

 

The Mako was only necessary for Colossi and Maws (and for some people, not even then).

[ExoGeniVI]

We are talking about ME1?  A game where singularity could take out an entire room, right?  

 

The Mako was only necessary for Colossi and Maws (and for some people, not even then).

I usually played on insanity all the time, which was pretty difficult when playing on foot without the Mako and it's sniper cannon.

[RoboticWater]

What I was saying is that with the large open worlds we'll be roaming, the whack-a-mole gameplay style of ME1-3 will make gameplay virtually impossible, just look at Mass Effect 1... You couldn't attack a pirate base without the supporting fire of your Mako. We need faster paced gameplay and to be able to call in 'Mac Strikes' (Halo Wars) For support when on large open alien worlds so we can at least have a chance on foot.

That's because Mass Effect 1 had awful level design and generally poor combat mechanics. Faster paced gameplay isn't going to pick up the slack created by a lack of cover or poor level design.

[Spectr61]

I fully support this suggestion. Anything that makes combat more free-form and a less tightly controlled experience is a step in the right direction.

This.

Soft cover, right hand advantage, and speed.

[Cyonan]

What I was saying is that with the large open worlds we'll be roaming, the whack-a-mole gameplay style of ME1-3 will make gameplay virtually impossible, just look at Mass Effect 1... You couldn't attack a pirate base without the supporting fire of your Mako. We need faster paced gameplay and to be able to call in 'Mac Strikes' (Halo Wars) For support when on large open alien worlds so we can at least have a chance on foot.

 

I wouldn't call assaulting pirate bases in ME1 on foot terribly hard, even on insanity. The Mako just make things go faster because you didn't need to be at all careful.

 

Although maybe with them going more open worldish we'll get some actual long range sniping going on.