903 réponses à ce sujet

[lukandroll]

Soruyao wrote...

Andaius20 wrote...

Switching to an overheat would at the very least punish me personally because it would force me to fire much more slowly and encourage me to stick with a single weapon. (If I tried to keep playing the way I do now, I would run out of thermal clips and be stuck with the ploddy overheat mechanic.) I can only speak for myself of course, but I would prefer firing a variety of weapons quickly to firing a single weapon slowly. I suspect there are a lot of other players who would feel the same, even ones who say they want a hybrid system now.

See I don't think you would. for example If the overheat bar equaled the clip sizes you have now you would in effect be gaining ammo every time you ducked into cover and aren't shooting. You'd be ejecting clips at the same rate. With the hybrid system you only gain the ability to choose to use a clip for faster recovery or wait for the heat to dissipate and keep your clip for later.

You also now have the option to Use the weapon your most comfortable with as much as you want as the situation calls for to you personally. Since under the hybrid system the clips would be really universal. IT would also have the added complexity of managing your weapons ROF to conserve clips or go all out and spend them perhaps regretting it later.

This is exactly what I'm saying shouldn't happen.  I do think the game should sometimes force you to use a weapon you're not completely comfortable using.    Being pushed a little out of your comfort zone is the best way to improve at the game.

In an overheat system, people will use nothing but the weapon they think is the best weapon all the time, even if their favorite weapon doesn't happen to be the best weapon.

The option to whenever play with this gun or the other, its up to the player, I don't like forced stuff...
If you like to be forced to play a game from one way, good for you, whatever flows your boat.
If I'm playing with an infiltrator, hint hint..... (drum roll)  I LIKE SNIPER RIFLES, and I don't want to use a SMG for the 90% of the game

What's the point of having different classes and specializations, if the majority of the time you are not using the gun you are good with?

Modifié par lukandroll, 01 mars 2010 - 10:45 .

[Fromyou]

this is a good thread and doesn't sound like a whinny fan boy at all sounds like a person with a open mind i like this

[Scarecrow_ES]

Well, I thank you for the support, Fromyou. I am a bit of a fanboy, actually, but that doesn't mean I am blind to any flaws or deficiencies that might exist. I hope you get something out of this thread, and walk away from it feeling enriched.

[Frotality]

lukandrol, i just want to say:









id very much love to not use a frikkin smg the vast majority of the time with my infiltrator. i really really REALLY do not know how some people can think forcing me to not use the weapon i love is a good gameplay mechanic. if your not a soldier, which 5/6ths of the classes arent...its SMG-palooza for the rest of the game whether you like it or not. strategy is supposed to be about making effective use of your options...not arbitrarily forcing me into them. if i want to use a sniper, then i deal with all the advantages and disadvantages that the weapon category comes with it, if i suck with it or use it in situations where it sucks, then its my own damn fault, and ill fully accept the often lethal consequences of that, like any other weapon. as the current ammo system would have it, there is no advantage to using a weapon effectively, just a varying degree of disadvantage for varying degrees of (mis)use, meaning that instead of accounting for proper use of the sniper, it only ever punishes misuse, meanig my only reward for using a sniper right is slightly less annoyance than if i didnt...fun this does not make. there is absolutely no need for such an unnecessary limitation outside of the soldier class...but not everyone is a soldier. in other shooters this works fine because you always have a range of weapons that are more or less your only means of attack, like a soldier. for everyone else, its nothing but a functionless frustration that challenges nothing but our temper, and as it is, i can play through insanity using incinerate 90% and an smg for 10%....and my sniper, with its incredible limitation, is relagated to a heavy weapon that has less uses than my actual heavy weapon. not only do i have a viable and unlimited attack that renders everything but the (occasional)smg useless, but my main weapon now has virtually no tactical advantage. the only reason i would ever use it is to end a fight quicker (such as the purpose of a heavy weapon), never actually needing it for any viable tactic. my sniper should not serve the same purpose as my missile launcher. the 4 main weapon classes are supposed to be equal; they each do better or worse than another in different situations, but they all serve the same role as your main weapon. in ME2, the incredible power of the sniper forces it into a very different an unequal role than say an AR or SMG. now consider that this isnt a typical shooter where the sniper is some weapon i find lying on the ground at some point in some levels, can use for a bit, then trade for an AR. no, in ME2 the sniper is the constant companion of those trained to use it, just as the AR, or shotgun, or pistol, or smg is the constant of those trained to use it. they are obviously then meant to serve the same roles..but they most certainly do not. and the most vaible and effective fix to this? the propsed hybrid ammo system; a mechanic that simultaneously punishes misuse, remembers (unlike ME2) to reward proper use, supports both paced and intense playstyles/ tactics, and effectively balances the main weapons to serve their purpose as main weapons.

[Scarecrow_ES]

I have to say, Frotality, I agree very much with what you've said there, but... wow. You were typing "stream-of-thought" weren't you?

[Soruyao]

Kinda busy with school stuff tonight so I can't put too much time into this. I will later, but for now I just want to say that I support your changes as long as what you say is true and I won't be forced into a playstyle that I don't enjoy for insanity mode. (Since that is exactly what you say you don't want to happen.)



That's just my personal take on it. I do feel overall tweaking the current system would be easier and in general a better choice, but I'd go along with the hybrid system if it accomplishes all that stuff, since preserving the things that I enjoyed about this game was at the heart of my disagreement.



If they make these changes and it works out well, you can bet I'll be one of the first people in line defending it, even if I was skeptical until the moment I tried it.

[Scarecrow_ES]

Soruyao... balancing is a big deal, and no matter how perfect a system is in principle, poor balancing can turn it into a loser. If I was on the dev staff and had my way, I think I'd have no problem balancing the system in a way that would please skeptics like yourself. You have a decerning taste, and you aren't gonna take someone's word that something's going to work out better until you see it in action. I'd have it no other way. In my mind, people like you are the ones I have to work the hardest to please, because unlike so many others who might be detractors of the system I'm proposing, you know enough about the mechanics to know the subtleties of the challenge ahead. If I can win over more people like yourself, I think the whole rest of the community would follow.

[Soruyao]

Scarecrow_ES wrote...

Soruyao... balancing is a big deal, and no matter how perfect a system is in principle, poor balancing can turn it into a loser. If I was on the dev staff and had my way, I think I'd have no problem balancing the system in a way that would please skeptics like yourself. You have a decerning taste, and you aren't gonna take someone's word that something's going to work out better until you see it in action. I'd have it no other way. In my mind, people like you are the ones I have to work the hardest to please, because unlike so many others who might be detractors of the system I'm proposing, you know enough about the mechanics to know the subtleties of the challenge ahead. If I can win over more people like yourself, I think the whole rest of the community would follow.

(hey look, I do have time after all!  stuff cleared up )

Thanks :3   Though, I honestly think I'm probably easier to please than most of the community since I'm more adaptable than most.   Whatever system we end up with, whether I like it or not, I'd find some way to make it work and get some fun out of it.    Though, I will say that out of anyone I've heard in the community, you're one of the few I'd trust to actually make a game with enough complexity that I would be entertained.  (Even if I might miss certain mechanics that suited me particularly well.)

It's much more difficult to please lazy players (those who don't put the thought required into being creative with their skills), because they're the players who are the most likely to complain a game is boring, and I think they're kind of the majority.  They're the ones I'm the most worried about, though if it were a choice between a mechanic they would like and one I would like, I'd of course prefer the one I'd like.  

Anyway, onto some random musing:  I think you're aware of the tweaks I would prefer to make to the current system, so I don't need to go over that again, so here's some random new stuff!

Lets assume that it's set in stone that we're working with a hybrid overheat/thermal clip mechanic!  Lets also assume that using a single weapon for the entire game will be a viable playstyle, though it may be slower and weaker and even potentially more dangerous.   Here's how I'd design this system personally, though of course it would take a lot of effort indeed to get it right.  (This system may be the most ambitious one out of this topic so far even :3)

1. Basically, I would create three different types of weapons.  One would act very similar to the ME1 weapons.   They would overheat and cool down about as fast as your normal ME1 weapons would. (But not the frictionless ones!  You would overheat if you fire too quickly!)   Another would use the ME2 formula, looting thermal clips off corpses and finding them in piles and using them like ammunition.  A third option would be hybrids, which would overheat but have a very high capacity to store that heat, but which would overheat catastrophically if you fired them too quickly.  (IE, stop working completely.)  You would then need to use several thermal clips at once (Lets do some handwaving and say 5 for now) to restore the weapon to functionality.   Therefore, a player who spaces his shots out slowly and uses the hybrid guns would be able to use the same weapon all the time, and would also be able to fire quickly in a spazzy fight with a bunch of husks, as he would just burn through his stock of thermal clips to get through it.

Essentially thermal clips would become variable for small arms in a similar way that power cells are variable for heavy weapons.  (Using a bunch to fix an overheated hybrid would be like using a single cain round to down a boss, while using a bunch of clips to maintain a ME2 weapon would be like using the particle beam to poke at individual enemies.   ... Sort of.)   I would (maybe, I have second thoughts about this) make it so that a player could mix and match their weapons as well.  Maybe they would like a sniper rifle that uses the ME1 system so they can poke away at a distant enemy when they need to without worrying about collecting a clip for every shot, but they'd like an AR that uses the ME2 system because they know they're only going to pull it out when things get hectic anyway.    Maybe they would like the hybrid guns for everything because they're confident they will play well enough not to run out of thermal clips and break them.

Of course, the different guns would need to be balanced so that the tradeoffs make sense:

I'd say the ME1 guns should do less damage per shot, since they are essentially going to be able to fire forever without any threat of not being able to fire for a long period of time at any moment.   Their guns would be balanced around being able to kill things fast enough not to get rushed.   They would be best for attrition and worst for hectic close range battles with enemies that get in your face with shotguns.  

The me2 guns would be balanced with the danger of running out of ammo and being forced to switch, of course.  They would hit the hardest of all three options, but you would have to be incredibly accurate and efficient or you would have to switch weapons around a lot.   (I would make every weapon as easy to run out of ammo with as the widow/carnifex.  You would get half a clip of your AR with each thermal clip.)   These guns would be best for hectic  and short fights (geth/husks) and would be worst for long range wars of attrition.  (blood pack)

The hybrid guns would be balanced with running out of thermal clips, however you would run out through improper spacing of your shots rather than accuracy.  These guns would situationally be the most dangerous because if you ran out of thermal clips with one of them, you'd run out of thermal clips with all of them.  You could potentially completely lock out your ability to fire your gun for a significant amount of time if you ran out and overheated again, and if you weren't careful this could happen to all your guns and you'd be pretty much screwed.   However, this system would have the best of both worlds and be able to deal well with any kind of battle you might end up in.   In other words, this setup would have the most utility, but also the most potential danger.   (The global nature of thermal clips in this setup means it would likely not be possible to use both hybrid guns and ME2 guns at the same time, mostly for UI reasons. ME2 guns gobble up thermal clips on the spot, and hybrid ones would stash them centrally.)

Heck, while I'm working with magical genie in the bottle infinite money and time game design, I'd also put in the thermal clip bonus skill I mentioned earlier.  It would take the place of something like warp ammo or slam and give the player an ability where they can invoke a GCD to create a thermal clip on the spot.  An infiltrator who wants his shots to do the most damage possible but also to use his sniper a lot could choose it and forgo using incinerate or cloak in order to feed himself extra sniper ammo so that he can continue to fire.   It would probably (definitely!) be a DPS loss overall, but it would be another potential playstyle.

Anyway, this would all require quite a bit of lore handwaving, but I'm pretty sure I could come up with a relatively plausible explanation.   I might even do that later on just to play with lore and made up science. :3   

Essentially, I think this system would please the people who liked the ME1 system, the people who liked the ME2 system, and the people who really want a hybrid system, since each person would be able to use exactly the system they prefer.

Modifié par Soruyao, 02 mars 2010 - 08:44 .

[Scarecrow_ES]

Soruyao... Lots to read there, and some very interesting ideas. Far more complex (probably more so than any developer would see as prudent), but definitely workable if BioWare wanted to get in and expand gameplay into more nuance than either of the last two have shown.



As far as lazy gamers being the majority, I'm sure that's right. But a VOCAL majority, no. The fact is most often players who actually work up the energy to come on a forum like this and put time into a post are in the great minority. We're the ones who are truly passionate about it. The lazy gamer might gripe to himself, and curse the company that made a given game, but even putting the energy into having his voice heard is going to be beyond what he's willing to do.



Those few of us who actually come through here and post, and especially those of us like you and I who can string together more than one sentence, we're so few compared to the greater community that we'd hardly be a drop of water in a pool. Of course, we're also likely to represent, most often, a very polarized opinion set. We represent one extreme or the other on an issue, as really, anyone who's just sorta "meh" about an issue isn't going to bother to weigh in on a discussion just to say they don't care either way. And really, that's the great problem developers face when trying to get feedback from the community.



They never get to hear from the happy medium that represents the bulk of their players. They only voices they hear are the extremes, and rarely are those voices so well-represented as ours. I'm hopeful that through discussions such as ours, the developers get to hear a real presentation of the reception of their gameplay designs, and through these many lines of text, we can show them a path toward pleasing the greater majority.

[Soruyao]

I really do hope the devs look at this topic, since there's a lot here they could potentially play around with. Also: This is fun!

While I'm in brainstorm mode, I want to address the GCD system. More specifically, I want to address warp. Warp spam is probably the least interesting strategy this game has to offer. It's probably one of the least effective. However, it is by far the safest and simplest. I have to this day never seen a single poster say they like spamming warp, but I have seen many many posters say they feel they are forced to by game mechanics.

Using the same gun all the time, I don't really like it as an option, but at least some people actually like doing that. Warp spam is the bane of adepts. It needs to die. (Unless some people disagree with me and actually like that strategy.) By the way, I'm not talking about using lift cleverly to warp explode people in groups. Average gatsby's videos show very clearly how complex and interesting a strategy that uses that often can be.

If warp alone was the problem, simply making it a more interesting skill or baking it's effect into all other adept abilities would be enough. (I'll get to some possible fixes for that later.) However, I think it's a larger problem with the GCD system.

I want to start by saying that I love the GCD system. One look at an average gatsby video will show you that the really skilled and knowledgable players will use a mix of abilities for great effect. However, it's very easy for a less informed player to stick with something they know works in all situations (albeit slowly), because this means they don't have to learn how to discern which situations their situational abilities would work the best in.

Here's some assorted ideas that I think could solve the problem.   I don't know if I would be able to choose between them, to be honest.  That's the beauty of not actually having to be the one who impliments stuff! 

1. A fast GCD and a slow GCD. The fast GCD would work the way it works now, however, it would only lock out the ability you used it for. The slow GCD would recharge half as fast, and would let you use any ability other than the one you used for the fast GCD. For instance: Our adept has both GCD's ready: He uses pull on a collector and then immediately explodes it with warp. This activates his fast GCD and locks out pull. Then he explodes it with warp. At this point his fast GCD is going to be nearly cool so he uses throw to knock out a collector who's barrier went down due to the shield. At this point his fast GCD will recharge twice before his slow GCD does, so he uses warp. The when his fast GCD recharges again he'll be able to use two abilities at once again.

In other words, this would turn the equivalent of fireball spam into something resembling a MMO rotation and it would cause players to notice they have skills that aren't warp.

It would be slightly more complex to work into the UI, but I think it's possible without cluttering the UI. One way would be to change the color of the half circles for the slow GCD. In other words, the actual closing of the half circles to the center would signify the fast GCD, and the color of the half circles (Red to yellow to green?) would indicate the slow one. Or even more simply, the left half circle could be the fast GCD and the right half circle could be the slow one.

2. Another option would be to put a certain spammy ability on it's own cooldown. (Or nerf the ability some and remove the cooldown completely!) For instance, lets say we made warp not cause a cooldown at all when used, but then cut it's power to 1/4th to 1/3rd or so of where it is now and remove it's ability to damage health. Playing an adept would involve pew pew pewing away at enemies with warp balls to remove their shields and then tossing them around like rag dolls. Essentially, adepts would become a class that doesn't need guns at all. (At least with proper speccing.)

This would pretty much be an adept only fix since I'm not sure exactly any other class would benefit from a similar change. (However, with vanguards, I'd simply give charge it's own GCD and let them use other abilities in between charges.)

3. Remove warp entirely and bake it's damage into other abilities! This is my favorite choice right now and the one that would take the least tweaking. Just make throw and pull and shockwave (and maybe even cryo blast) do a lot more damage to defenses. All you would have to do is make each biotic ability do damage in a different way or to different things. Maybe throw works best against barriers and pull works best against biotics, and shockwave works best against shields. Maybe all biotics work well on armor and biotics and weak to shields, but throw causes a stumble/flinch while pull does more damage but doesn't stumble or mess up their shooting, and shockwave does less single target damage but damages multiple targets.

Modifié par Soruyao, 02 mars 2010 - 09:54 .

[Poison_Berrie]

lukandroll wrote...
The option to whenever play with this gun or the other, its up to the player, I don't like forced stuff...
If you like to be forced to play a game from one way, good for you, whatever flows your boat.
If I'm playing with an infiltrator, hint hint..... (drum roll)  I LIKE SNIPER RIFLES, and I don't want to use a SMG for the 90% of the game

What's the point of having different classes and specializations, if the majority of the time you are not using the gun you are good with?

How odd, the majority of my kills were with the sniper rifle. The SMG and pistol were for when they closed in on me or when I had run out of sniper ammo. 

I think the current diversification in weapons vs. defenses adds to the gameplay. If you want to be a one trick pony, you shouldn't blaze through the game you should struggle. 

[Andaius20]

Thats what he said isn't it? That if he wants to use the sniper rifle in a not so friendly sniper rifle situation he should be able to but if he gets killed because of it oh well it was his fault? Your forced into the Auto weapons because they have the most ammo and pick up the most ammo per clip.

[Soruyao]

Andaius20 wrote...

Thats what he said isn't it? That if he wants to use the sniper rifle in a not so friendly sniper rifle situation he should be able to but if he gets killed because of it oh well it was his fault? Your forced into the Auto weapons because they have the most ammo and pick up the most ammo per clip.

I'm really curious.  If they implimented the system I outlined a few posts ago where there were guns that have an overheat mechanic but do less damage, and guns that have a hybrid overheat but are more dangerous, would you approve?

How about trading something like warp ammo for being able to create thermal clips?  Would that be okay or is it just the fact that you have to pick up thermal clips at all?

I wanna understand where you're coming from a little better so I can come up with some ideas that would suit people who don't like the current system and also work well for people like me who like it.

[Andaius20]

Personally? I liked how they worked in ME 1. The Idea was original for a shooter. All you needed was better balancing for the weapons. They could have Dropped the I-X and made each companies firearms have pro's and cons instead of being slightly better in everything for each successive company.

Your Idea isn't half bad however, have three types of weapon systems would be interesting. However the big fault is ammo drops. Like Whats if your using ammo based weapons but your enemies aren't so don't drop clips. IF your always going to fight enemies that drop ammo and are going to find ammo in the environment, why use the weapons the hit for less power ever?

However I can see the advantage of picking guns from each class to maximize the system. like your pistol would be the fall back gun so have no ammo requirements, the mid range gun be a hybrid and the sniper either be the unlimited ammo type or the ammo type with most damage.

My "Ideal" would be the pure overheat of ME 1 with the weapon skills, like carnage, overkill, and marksmen, with the Rock paper scissors damage model added in with ME 2 (I liked that bit!). That alone would have been perfect. If you really wanted to keep the Clips in they would be a universal pick up that you could optionally spend to get instant cool downs. I was actually reading the ME 2 manual on the thermal clips and they made it sound like each clip had several heat sinks "bullets" lets say per clip. So we could even take it further and say each clip has say like 5 "reloads" worth of heat sinks. that you could swap as fast as we see now. then you'd have to do a longer "thermal clip change out" if you expend all your heat sinks. That way you wouldn't have to drop tonnes of Thermals to have a bigger "ammo" supply. Or in the case of the hybrid overheat, ROF.

Modifié par Andaius20, 03 mars 2010 - 06:14 .

[Soruyao]

Andaius20 wrote...

Personally? I liked how they worked in ME 1. The Idea was original for a shooter. All you needed was better balancing for the weapons. They could have Dropped the I-X and made each companies firearms have pro's and cons instead of being slightly better in everything for each successive company.

Your Idea isn't half bad however, have three types of weapon systems would be interesting. However the big fault is ammo drops. Like Whats if your using ammo based weapons but your enemies aren't so don't drop clips. IF your always going to fight enemies that drop ammo and are going to find ammo in the environment, why use the weapons the hit for less power ever?

However I can see the advantage of picking guns from each class to maximize the system. like your pistol would be the fall back gun so have no ammo requirements, the mid range gun be a hybrid and the sniper either be the unlimited ammo type or the ammo type with most damage.

My "Ideal" would be the pure overheat of ME 1 with the weapon skills, like carnage, overkill, and marksmen, with the Rock paper scissors damage model added in with ME 2 (I liked that bit!). That alone would have been perfect. If you really wanted to keep the Clips in they would be a universal pick up that you could optionally spend to get instant cool downs. I was actually reading the ME 2 manual on the thermal clips and they made it sound like each clip had several heat sinks "bullets" lets say per clip. So we could even take it further and say each clip has say like 5 "reloads" worth of heat sinks. that you could swap as fast as we see now. then you'd have to do a longer "thermal clip change out" if you expend all your heat sinks. That way you wouldn't have to drop tonnes of Thermals to have a bigger "ammo" supply. Or in the case of the hybrid overheat, ROF.

Hmm, there's some food for thought here.   I don't at all mind the idea of having a thermal clip which has multiple reloads and then a longer changeout animation.  I don't think it would hurt balance much but it could be kind of interesting.

I also misread something you said where you were talking about expending heat sinks to get instant cooldowns, and for a second I thought you were saying you could optionally use thermal clips to refresh your GCD.   I think that could actually be a neat idea.   You could pop maybe three or so thermal clips and somehow refresh a cooldown and be able to overload twice in a row or something.   A lot of balance problems would come with that and it would be almost completely impossible to come up with a lore explanation for it, but it could be interesting.

I think having most enemies (even collectors) drop thermal clips consistently makes lore sense if you think of thermal clips as a supercooled liquid.   Collectors would use them in their guns as well since it's a very good way to keep a gun working.   However, it would be better if the thermal clips that collectors drop looked different from standard ones.  (They would look more curvy and collectory!)  You would extract the same liquid from them, but it would make a little bit more sense why they have them.

[Andaius20]

Well since you basically use your omni-tool for all the Tech powers you could reintro omni-gel and make it into a system where you inject extra omni-gel to instantly refresh your tech cooldowns. And makeup something that a biotic can use to do the same. Like a dark energy "battery" they could use to power there next attack.

Found some info on the "hybrid" system bio was working on before going with the "Ammo" system social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/1528869/1#1528869 If you care to look at it. You can infact mod your game to use this system, like he says.

Modifié par Andaius20, 03 mars 2010 - 09:01 .

[DarthValo81]

Scarecrow_ES wrote...

Soruyao... balancing is a big deal, and no matter how perfect a system is in principle, poor balancing can turn it into a loser. If I was on the dev staff and had my way, I think I'd have no problem balancing the system in a way that would please skeptics like yourself. You have a decerning taste, and you aren't gonna take someone's word that something's going to work out better until you see it in action. I'd have it no other way. In my mind, people like you are the ones I have to work the hardest to please, because unlike so many others who might be detractors of the system I'm proposing, you know enough about the mechanics to know the subtleties of the challenge ahead. If I can win over more people like yourself, I think the whole rest of the community would follow.

Great thread and a lot of great ideas.  The only thing I'd really like to comment on at this point is the talk of balance.  Balance is great and necessary, for the first playthrough.   Being a solely single player experience,  I would not like to be able to max out my level on one playthrough and have it require a second or third to do so, and in those second or third playthroughs I want the option to create an overpowered character who can mow enemies down with ease.  To me, thats fun.  If I have invested 30-40 hours for one playthrough, I deserve to play around.  If that means spamming certain abilities endlessly,  I would like that option because there is no need for the game to be "fair" as it is not multiplayer.  I got this feeling in ME1, not so much in ME2 as I felt required to play the game a certain way.
I read your entire OP and the ideas you provided as improvements and very similar to what I(and others) was thinking, so who knows, maybe some of these ideas will get implemented in some fashion.

Modifié par DarthValo81, 03 mars 2010 - 11:51 .

[rabbitchannel]

I would like to bump this.

[lukandroll]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

lukandroll wrote...
The option to whenever play with this gun or the other, its up to the player, I don't like forced stuff...
If you like to be forced to play a game from one way, good for you, whatever flows your boat.
If I'm playing with an infiltrator, hint hint..... (drum roll)  I LIKE SNIPER RIFLES, and I don't want to use a SMG for the 90% of the game

What's the point of having different classes and specializations, if the majority of the time you are not using the gun you are good with?

How odd, the majority of my kills were with the sniper rifle. The SMG and pistol were for when they closed in on me or when I had run out of sniper ammo. 

I think the current diversification in weapons vs. defenses adds to the gameplay. If you want to be a one trick pony, you shouldn't blaze through the game you should struggle. 

I see where you're coming, but as I said earlier, its part of the role playing part of the game, If my character is builded like a expert markman with rifles, that's what I would like to use, since that's what where my character's abilities lies...
If I'm too stupid too see that a Sniper riffle is not the best option in close encounters and some krogan kills me, that's completely my fault, because I choose to do it that way; the big difference lies in the CHOICE.
Or not, I could be a sniper with perfect reflexes, and shoot the krogan -that's two feet away from me, with the Widow right between his eyes, because I'm that good. Once again the choice its there, even If I'd ****ed up, the fault will it be mine, because I'm the one who's role playing the character and It was my call.

Modifié par lukandroll, 03 mars 2010 - 10:11 .

[Scarecrow_ES]

DarthValo... when we talk of balance, at least when I do, we aren't necessarily talking about providing the player with the same level of challenge regardless of the choices he's made and the progress of his character. Certainly that's part of it. But the larger part of balance is in ensuring that every gameplay system that you've instituted works properly and consistantly, no matter what situation we find our player in. I'm like you in that I feel that the first playthrough of a game should present a challenge to the player and should represent the "purest" form of the game they'll get to experience. Then, after that, the player should be free to carry over and make the uber-character their fantasies have been screaming for in "New Game+" scenarios. Ultimately, though, balance should always be geared toward that first playthrough, where every every players' character is unique but equal.



I think Lukandroll expresses a sentiment I very much share. Much of the point in RPGs is to create a character unique to you that plays a specific way. Mass Effect gives us a base class with certain strengths and weaknesses as well as certain gameplay aesthetics attached to it. Our choice of initial class, and our subsequent choices in class progression are meant to differentiate our individual player experience from the next person's.



In choosing the Infiltrator class, players look to do good damage from a distance with the sniper rifle (the Infiltrator is so focused on this weapon that it receives sniper-specific gameplay features), and avoid direct combat with debuff powers and the stealthy Tactical Cloak. I find it odd then, in a class so focused on NOT rushing into battle, that it's nearly impossible to do so and survive. It makes me wonder... if I can't stay back and snipe to support my front-line squadmates... if I can't use my tactical cloak to actually sneak around enemy positions to wreak havok without being seen... if I can't actually play as the super secret agent assassin that the character class claims to be... then what is the point of choosing to play the Infiltrator class, other than the other character classes suck so much worse?

[Poison_Berrie]

Scarecrow_ES wrote...
In choosing the Infiltrator class, players look to do good damage from a distance with the sniper rifle (the Infiltrator is so focused on this weapon that it receives sniper-specific gameplay features), and avoid direct combat with debuff powers and the stealthy Tactical Cloak. I find it odd then, in a class so focused on NOT rushing into battle, that it's nearly impossible to do so and survive. It makes me wonder... if I can't stay back and snipe to support my front-line squadmates... if I can't use my tactical cloak to actually sneak around enemy positions to wreak havok without being seen... if I can't actually play as the super secret agent assassin that the character class claims to be... then what is the point of choosing to play the Infiltrator class, other than the other character classes suck so much worse?

I never had to actually rush forward unless I wanted to or when the mission called for it (those are few).
Needing to use another weapon for close up is more an issue of how large the theater of combat is and how the enemy and allies AI works.
I was often a little disappointed that I could not just send them to advance while I covered them with the sniper-rifle.

The cloak was over too quick for proper flanking, though. It would benefit from a longer duration, to get you behind or beside an enemy.

[Scarecrow_ES]

The SMG is effective enough that you can use it in most situations once it's been upgraded, and of course you have Incinerate as an Infiltrator, which is just a heat-seeking missile. That helps you to not have to press forward. But running out of Sniper ammo when you've got a lot of fight left ahead of you and you've been intentionally hanging back forces you to move up and use the SMG or scrounge for ammo.



It's weird, actually. I was reading a review from Game Informer today... I love the magazine but I literally hate the review section as I wonder what games these guys are actually playing most of the time. Anyway, I was reading the ME2 review, and a few things struck me. All of the things that the reviewers were happy about with the new game I am very unhappy about... the loss of many RPG elements, the focus on limited intense combat, the strict mission structure, gun ammo... and all the things they were really unhappy about, I was either ambivalent over, or thought was necessary but poorly executed... like the mini games and such.



It seems to me that game developers might be listening quite heavily to these types of reviews, and of course we know that the retarded masses already spout these types of reviews as scripture. I think that's really doing more harm than good for much of the community.

[colossus50000]

Scarecrow_ES wrote...

It's weird, actually. I was reading a review from Game Informer today... I love the magazine but I literally hate the review section as I wonder what games these guys are actually playing most of the time. Anyway, I was reading the ME2 review, and a few things struck me. All of the things that the reviewers were happy about with the new game I am very unhappy about... the loss of many RPG elements, the focus on limited intense combat, the strict mission structure, gun ammo... and all the things they were really unhappy about, I was either ambivalent over, or thought was necessary but poorly executed... like the mini games and such.

It seems to me that game developers might be listening quite heavily to these types of reviews, and of course we know that the retarded masses already spout these types of reviews as scripture. I think that's really doing more harm than good for much of the community.

I completly agree. it seems that they listen to to many of these trigger happy gamers that play way too many FPS and not the RPG gamers that loved mass effect 1 for its stat based, story driven, character connection that Mass effect 1 was.  i do like Mass Effect 2 alot, but i dont feel as if im even playing Mass Effect sometimes if that even makes sense. Mass Effect 1 really caught my eye every since I remember seeing the trailer for the first time, it was something new. Then when i played it i was amazed at what i could do, you were really building Commander Sheppard as you wanted him/she to be. Yes these elements were brought over but in my opinion very poorly. it felt as it was cramed together instead of smoothly put together. Alot of people have said before and ill say it again the game was really "dumbed down". 

I liked alot of your input about how on improving the game you made alot of good points and i feel the desingers should listen to people more like you who toke there time to express themselves in a mature manner and not just state that something is wrong.

As i play Mass Effect 2 i really miss things that should have never been taken out.
1. The Strong Stat-based part of this RPG. now its just a few points for a few things. i have a friend whos played RPGs since he was very young and never has he spent stat points for the convo or dialogue aspect of the game. until he played Mass Effect 1 and said it accaully felt like you were gaining something from it.
2. Mako. They should have just updated it or do as the OP said. simple.
3. The Elevators. for the impatient people in the wolrd this was removed. i yet to see a difference from how a loading screen made you feel more submerged in the game then accaully keeping the game inplay. i thought the elevators were ten times better then loading screens every were. i felt myself not everylooking away, even though you werent really seeing much i still felt like i was in the game.

Bioware listen to the OP and the smart people posting in this forum. not the dual wielding idiots that want stupid things in Mass Effect because they think its "cool".

[Scarecrow_ES]

Don't get me wrong. As a whole, Mass Effect 2 is a far superior game in most ways. But in very many ways, BioWare strayed away from what made the first one the massive hit that it was, and really only answered the criticisms... Granted, some of those criticisms needed to be answered, as there were certain shortcomings in the game, but for the most part, many complaints leveled against ME1 were of the type "this game is not enough like other games I like to play." I find it so difficult to deal with that BioWare, a company that's put together some of my most beloved RPGs, including the first Mass Effect, could drift so far away from even their less-than-traditional RPG roots to the gameplay we see in ME2.



It's a better game, but it's also less an RPG. Given how great the story is, and how solid the character interaction is, had the RPG elements still been there and the combat cleaned up a bit, I think this one would hold a higher place on my favorites list. In fact, I'm not sure ME2 even rates nearly as high as ME1, despite the technical superiority.

[Poison_Berrie]

Scarecrow_ES wrote...

Don't get me wrong. As a whole, Mass Effect 2 is a far superior game in most ways. But in very many ways, BioWare strayed away from what made the first one the massive hit that it was, and really only answered the criticisms... Granted, some of those criticisms needed to be answered, as there were certain shortcomings in the game, but for the most part, many complaints leveled against ME1 were of the type "this game is not enough like other games I like to play." I find it so difficult to deal with that BioWare, a company that's put together some of my most beloved RPGs, including the first Mass Effect, could drift so far away from even their less-than-traditional RPG roots to the gameplay we see in ME2.

What's wrong with trying something else, though. I don't get people who get angry with developers because they try to do something else with their game. I get people not liking the product, but it's not like they are actually betraying you by not making a product that similar to their previous ones. There seems to be a lot of that false entitlement going on (mostly in other threads, though).

As for elevators vs. load movies. Neither seems to work better (for PC). Replacing the loading movies with a logo has drastically improved load times for me.
Elevators gave a nice sense of a connected world, but for the short conversations or news messages you got the rides were too long. It would be nice if you could do more in them while waiting. 

It would be nice to have some use of skills outside of combat. Right now the focus is extremely on combat and it would be nice if the could give it some outside use (skill/class based interrupts).