77 réponses à ce sujet

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

Coldcall01 wrote...

Honestly guys compare old classics like XCOM which were developed in the 90s with no more than 3 megabytes of code. Just compare the difference in gameply depth. Its astonishing.

ME2 clocks in at 15 gigs+ and its gameply mechanisms could be coded on the back of a postcard.

Is this a bad joke? I certainly hope so.

[Khavos]

Veex wrote...

Khavos wrote...

Depth is a much better term than complexity.

ME2 is undeniably a shallow game.  It's pretty good fun, but shallow. 

Of course, I couldn't even finish DA:O due to getting bored with the MMO mechanics, so what do I know? 

I think it has depth where it counts, in that the character interaction and story elements are at least on par with the original in my opinion. I'd also argue that a bloated inventory with inconsequential items doesn't make a game "deep" in any relevant sense, but perhaps that is of value to some.

Well, I never said that I though ME1 was a particularly deep game, either.  I wasn't a big fan of that inventory system.  I did enjoy at least being able to alter my squad's gear, though, I won't lie.  

As far as character interaction goes...have you noticed that there's really nothing you can do to not accomplish your goals regarding your squad?  Renegade, Paragon...kill X, don't kill X.  Be a jerk, don't be a jerk.  You get the same outcome regardless.

[newcomplex]

Personally, I disagree completely. Mass Effect 2 has the more core differentiation between its character classes, moreso then ME1, while Dragon Age lets you control in person different squadmates, the playstyle really doesn't variate if you play a different class. In ME2, playing the game as an adept or vanguard gives you a totally different experience then playing as a infiltrator.

However, some points I would agree with is that the lack of weapons and class specific armor does determent from it, but not to the point where it becomes worse then Dragon age, or even close to the point where it becomes worse then ME1.

Khavos wrote...

Well, I never said that I though ME1 was a
particularly deep game, either.  I wasn't a big fan of that inventory
system.  I did enjoy at least being able to alter my squad's gear,
though, I won't lie.  

As far as character interaction
goes...have you noticed that there's really nothing you can do to not
accomplish your goals regarding your squad?  Renegade, Paragon...kill X,
don't kill X.  Be a jerk, don't be a jerk.  You get the same outcome
regardless.

Is their different from any bioware game?   Or different from any game in general?  

Modifié par newcomplex, 02 février 2010 - 11:41 .

[Tasker]

I'm pretty much with the OP on this one.

Despite loving the game, there isn't anything that makes me want to play it again, except for maybe the couple of achivements i'm missing and maybe the Talimance, but other than those it just seems like too much of a chore compaired to ME1.

As well as those subjects already mentioned, I want to know...

Why the tiny assortment of weapons we have have no stats?  - Seriously a role playing game with no weapon stats, how the hell am I supposed to know which is better.  At least in ME1 I could choose weapons based on wether they did more damage or how many shots before overheating, now in ME2 it's WTF does this do?

Why have they replaced the mission briefings from ME1 with the "oh crap I keep forgetting to check my emails" system in ME2?  I realise it's for making it easier to include DLC, but when I don't even realise I have missions to do then I have to question if the system is working properly.

UCWs, they just needed to be smaller and have more in them so they were more like Bring down the sky, instead they get replaced completely with the "Can't be arsed looking for them and are over in 30 seconds" N7 missions.

Why do we have to go hunting for resources and research parts when we could just ask Mr TIM, he's already spent millions on Shepard, Normandy and the mission, what's a little bit more cash in the grand scheme of things.

Why the hell do we have that obnoxious mission completeed screen pop up every half an hour, it really is immersion breaking and really started to get on my nerves.
There are others to, but they're the only ones that come to mind for now.

Modifié par Orkboy, 02 février 2010 - 11:42 .

[Faust1979]

I like the way it played out this isn't X Com UFO defense a slow moving tactical simulation game. This is a fast paced action/roleplaying game. I think adding in a bigger tech tree would slow the pace down. X Com is fun but this game isn't meant to be that

[Veex]

Khavos wrote...

As far as character interaction goes...have you noticed that there's really nothing you can do to not accomplish your goals regarding your squad?  Renegade, Paragon...kill X, don't kill X.  Be a jerk, don't be a jerk.  You get the same outcome regardless.

I managed to have two non loyal squadmates entering the suicide mission on my first playthrough despite doing their loyalty missions. It's possible. Well three, but I don't really count Zaeed.

[Chclve]

I love this game, but not having ANY weapon customization is just silly. BRING BACK THE MODS.

[Aratham Darksight]

Coldcall01 wrote...

Levelling: The only xp appears to come from finnishing a mission or a quest. As I've mentioned before on this forum, in ME2 Shepard can safely sit behind crates smoking a spliff while he lets his squad do all the killing. The game would not even notice. Boring and hardly an incentive to lead from the front. The squad all levels up together which is also boring, simplified and dumbed down. People wonder how they finnished the development so quickly; wonder no longer :-)

Funny thing how in the good old days of five years ago "quest XP only" was the holy grail of the hardcore RPG-ers in the community. Now it's boring and dumbed down.
Hate to break this to you, but you could gain xp for squad member kills in the original ME, too. And why wouldn't you? Do you want to penalize players who use support-ish classes? Must everyone play exactly the same way as you?

XP: There is no screen to check ones current xp. The only indicator is how much xp is required for next level. Again, dumbed down and boring.

Seriously? Having your total XP displayed is clever and exciting? Really?

Research: More boring linear research with no tree to menion. The system is based on finding or buying upgrades and there appears no direction to this research.  Boring and thoughtless. Compare with the complex research tree implemented in the old 90s XCOM UFO Enemy Unknown and one can see just how little thought Bioware put into research. Like an afterthought. Even more ridiculous is the fact that once you buy the research, the end product is made and implemented within seconds of having chosen it as a researech topic. ya right, really realistic Bioware.

You said in the thread title that you would be making comparisons with DA and ME1, but now you're bringing up strategy games? I object to this false advertising! Why not go ahead and compare it with the enormous tech trees in Galactic Civilizations 2? I must admit, Mass Effect 2's colony management system is fairly poor, too.
You're pretty vague about what you wanted from the research system. Bringing up Xcom doesn't really make your point clearer, since that game also relied on researching items you found. When there were any dependencies between the research projects, they were usually linear chains with the occasional offshoot. Which isn't all that different from how ME2 research projects are structured.

Weapons: I wont go on too much but i find the lack of variety compared to ME1 pretty depressing.

WHAT variety? The two models in three colours? The 5 point differences in damage vs accuracy? Or is it the scary nouns with an increasing roman number after them that gave the ME1 system its depth?

Upgrades: These are really boring and have no sense of having improved much at all. Especially when most of thema re just part of a bland series which does the same thing each upgrade, such as +5% health, or +10% biotics...they just go on and on without any new functionality. Boring.

Armour: This is probably my biggest beef as at least in ME1 you had a large choice of armour. The choice of Shepards armour in ME2 is a joke considering what we had in ME1. And the causal wardrobe is really stupid. 4 outfits and the piratey one just looks hilariously stupid. This must have been rushed because i cannot believe Bioware were satisfied with the armour and casual wardrobe for Shepard. Inability to toggle helmet as in ME1! I could go on an on but i wont bother.

And the armour for your squad is the bigger joke. There is just no way to customise your squad in any meaningful way.

These two I'll partly agree with. Global upgrades instead of buying better versions of the same gun are fine with me, but there was a disappointing lack of customisability for your gear. Sure, what we had in ME1 wasn't all that great, those were also mostly numerical improvements with no added functionality. But this was one element that ought to have been expanded on, not eliminated.

[Tasker]

Aratham Darksight wrote...
These two I'll partly agree with. Global upgrades instead of buying better versions of the same gun are fine with me, but there was a disappointing lack of customisability for your gear. Sure, what we had in ME1 wasn't all that great, those were also mostly numerical improvements with no added functionality. But this was one element that ought to have been expanded on, not eliminated.

Agreed, If they had gotten rid of everything having 10 levels and everything just had 1, so there was just 1 friction upgrade and 1 shield boost upgrade etc..., but still have them as mods instead of research, then it would have been streamlined whilst still maintaining a [smaller] inventory system.

Modifié par Orkboy, 02 février 2010 - 11:52 .

[1N54N3]

/agree



I think BW tried a little bit too hard to streamline ME2. Hopefully ME3 will have the best from both and be truely epic

[Aratham Darksight]

Orkboy wrote...

Aratham Darksight wrote...
These two I'll partly agree with. Global upgrades instead of buying better versions of the same gun are fine with me, but there was a disappointing lack of customisability for your gear. Sure, what we had in ME1 wasn't all that great, those were also mostly numerical improvements with no added functionality. But this was one element that ought to have been expanded on, not eliminated.

Agreed, If they had gotten rid of everything having 10 levels and everything just had 1, so there was just 1 friction upgrade and 1 shield boost upgrade etc..., but still have them as mods instead of research, then it would have been streamlined whilst still maintaining a [smaller] inventory system.

Why would it need an inventory? You could just buy/find the schematics for a mod and then tell the Normandy to have a new personal heavy pistol with a scope and a stabilizer (or one with scram rails and expanded heatsinks) ready for you when you get back. And have it painted pink. It could easily fit into the present armoury system.

[FinchyHoha]

GHOST OF FRUITY wrote...

I can't say I enjoyed Dragon's Age as much as I hoped I would, but it does have more in terms of complexity and that does give it better longevity. I can't say I enjoyed the story or the characters, but I like the potential variety the game gives you. It's a game i'd play again for that reason.

ME2 is the polar opposite for me. The game perhaps has less to offer in terms of replay value through it's lighter customisation and less option in how you set up your squad, but I enjoyed the characters and story so much that I know i'll want to play through the game many times.

Two different games that for me have replay value for different reasons.

I agree with everything in this post, except the part about Dragon Age's complexity. Not only was the story boring and the characters trite, but the skill choices were awful as well. Half of the trees are terrible, another quarter are dull passives, and the last quarter you use over and over.

I don't understand how people could complain about the character and item depth in ME2. If you liked ME1, there's demonstrably more of everything, except for passive skills and pallette swapped equipment. And if you're comparing to DA:O, well that's just stupid, since not only are they aiming at different things, DA was a ploddingly paced, cliche fest. At least compare it to the old D&D licenced franchises. And I don't think Mass Effect is even pretending to try to accomplish the same thing as Neverwinter Nights or one of the Infinity Engine games.

Modifié par FinchyHoha, 03 février 2010 - 12:04 .

[Kalfear]

agree again

For me the biggest reason im struggling to stay interested on my replay is

ITS THE EXACT SAME STORY

I couldnt effect anything in my first play through so every replay is ecatly the same until the final sceen of the game!
Thats boring, linear, and boring

Fanghorne wrote...

DAO is just a superior game.
The immersive world that was ME was truly in and of itself astonishing. After that the game dropped off, in MEII even more so. Bioware simply made a total gem in DAO and I was hoping for the same in MEII,,.very disappointed to say the least.

Agree

I rate ME1 as my all time favorite Bioware game so I went in WANTING to like ME2 but its just to weak of a game, DA:O is the far superior game on every level!

Its character development was nothing short of amazing and pulled you in forcing you to have some type of emotional responce to the characters.

Id gladly pay anouther $80.00 if ME2 could develop the emotional connection you found in DA:O

Modifié par Kalfear, 03 février 2010 - 12:10 .

[T1l]

Yep.



One play though was ample. More than anything else it's the planet scanning I can't bring myself to do again. The Mako had its flaws, but driving around on a lost worlds surface was a lot more interesting than playing "Probe Launched: Probe Away - The Game."

[Khavos]

Veex wrote...

Khavos wrote...

As far as character interaction goes...have you noticed that there's really nothing you can do to not accomplish your goals regarding your squad?  Renegade, Paragon...kill X, don't kill X.  Be a jerk, don't be a jerk.  You get the same outcome regardless.

I managed to have two non loyal squadmates entering the suicide mission on my first playthrough despite doing their loyalty missions. It's possible. Well three, but I don't really count Zaeed.

Fair point.  Without enough paragon points, you can't keep one of them.  Though I can't for the life of me think who the second one would be, as I must've missed that somewhere.  

[Schurge]

I don't believe that replay value is diminished in MEII. I'd say its just as good as MEI's was. I can't speak for Dragon Age.

If, however, you are drawn to 'replay' games because of being able to really change your spec into something completely different - I can see your point. I think the amount of customization is fine, but if that is what draws you to replay a game, well then... it's just not there for you.

EDIT: If anything dimenishes replay value it is definently scanning... it takes several minutes to scan a single planet, is extremely boring, and I don't have a big enough music library to get me through it.

smudgedhorizon wrote...

I also don't have enough money for fuel to fully explore the galaxy after buying upgrades, and there were very few sidequests. Why can't I trade surplus resources for credits?

This as well. Very short-sided of them.

Modifié par Schurge, 03 février 2010 - 12:15 .

[Brayton]

This is why I don't chase and search for all the missions on my first play through XD

[FinchyHoha]

Kalfear wrote...



For me the biggest reason im struggling to stay interested on my replay is

ITS THE EXACT SAME STORY

Just like ME1... and the "choices" in DA:O or any other recent BioWare game are equally cosmetic. Hmm... I either save this kid from the demon and get no real benefit, or I make a deal with the demon, and get no real benefit. The differences are purely cosmetic. Oh and I lose "influence" with some people in my party, which I get back by handing them **** I found on the street.

[Veex]

FinchyHoha wrote...

Just like ME1... and the "choices" in DA:O or any other recent BioWare game are equally cosmetic. Hmm... I either save this kid from the demon and get no real benefit, or I make a deal with the demon, and get no real benefit. The differences are purely cosmetic. Oh and I lose "influence" with some people in my party, which I get back by handing them **** I found on the street.

Ugh, don't even remind me of the gift system from Dragon Age. I did nothing but insult Morrigan for an entirety of a playthrough and had her sitting at 100 the entire time.

[Kalfear]

Schurge wrote...

I don't believe that replay value is diminished in MEII. I'd say its just as good as MEI's was. I can't speak for Dragon Age.

If, however, you are drawn to 'replay' games because of being able to really change your spec into something completely different - I can see your point. I think the amount of customization is fine, but if that is what draws you to replay a game, well then... it's just not there for you.

EDIT: If anything dimenishes replay value it is definently scanning... it takes several minutes to scan a single planet, is extremely boring, and I don't have a big enough music library to get me through it.

smudgedhorizon wrote...

I also don't have enough money for fuel to fully explore the galaxy after buying upgrades, and there were very few sidequests. Why can't I trade surplus resources for credits?

This as well. Very short-sided of them.

No, Im talking about changing the game around me!

In ME1 (and DA:O) everythiung you do results in a different outcome for the game and a different gamoing experience!

Its not all about playing a different class.
Its about effecting the world around you so you not follwoing a preset linear path

I gotta say, anyone that thinks ME2 has same replay value as ME1 (or DA:O) has probably never played ME1 (or DA:O) because the differences or so appearent even a blind bias shooter fan couldnt ignore them.

In ME2, you have ZERO effect of your surroundings and universe. Every playthrough will be exactly the same and the only choice you have is at the very end of the game. Period.

Oh sure you might lose or save a few more squadmates in the final mission but having no emotional connection to them makes that rather unimportant or meaningful!

Morrigan walking away after you proclaim your love for her in DA:O, now that had meaning and screamed emotional connection! ME2 has nothing that comes even remotely close to that in their game.

[Endurance_117]

DOA is the same thing different race/class.. It's all the same after you are halfway through the game. The ending was a joke

[77boy84]

Levelling: The only xp appears to come from finnishing a mission or a quest. As I've mentioned before on this forum, in ME2 Shepard can safely sit behind crates smoking a spliff while he lets his squad do all the killing. The game would not even notice. Boring and hardly an incentive to lead from the front. The squad all levels up together which is also boring, simplified and dumbed down. People wonder how they finnished the development so quickly; wonder no longer :-)

Really? When I played I had to do most of the work, and my squadmates barely ever pulled their own weight.

Also ME1 had group leveling. I don't know how you can argue that ME2's leveling up system is less complex than ME1's when they both do the same thing.

XP: There is no screen to check ones current xp. The only indicator is how much xp is required for next level. Again, dumbed down and boring.

What is the point? Seeing how much XP needed is better than seeing one huge number out of an even bigger number. It's not dumbed down, it's more efficient.

Research: More boring linear research with no tree to menion. The system is based on finding or buying upgrades and there appears no direction to this research.  Boring and thoughtless. Compare with the complex research tree implemented in the old 90s XCOM UFO Enemy Unknown and one can see just how little thought Bioware put into research. Like an afterthought. Even more ridiculous is the fact that once you buy the research, the end product is made and implemented within seconds of having chosen it as a researech topic. ya right, really realistic Bioware.

...Are you just joking?
Is this supposed to be funny or something?

Weapons: I wont go on too much but i find the lack of variety compared to ME1 pretty depressing.

ME1 did not have a variety of weapons. All Assault Rifles felt and looked the same, all pistols felt and looked the same etc etc etc. ME2's weapons actually feel different and LOOK different. Also, having a hundred guns with slightly different stats doesn't mean much when everyone only uses the spectre weapons.

Upgrades: These are really boring and have no sense of having improved much at all. Especially when most of thema re just part of a bland series which does the same thing each upgrade, such as +5% health, or +10% biotics...they just go on and on without any new functionality. Boring.

Except this was pretty much the same way ME1 had upgrades.

Armour: This is probably my biggest beef as at least in ME1 you had a large choice of armour. The choice of Shepards armour in ME2 is a joke considering what we had in ME1. And the causal wardrobe is really stupid. 4 outfits and the piratey one just looks hilariously stupid. This must have been rushed because i cannot believe Bioware were satisfied with the armour and casual wardrobe for Shepard. Inability to toggle helmet as in ME1! I could go on an on but i wont bother.

Lets look at the armor variety in Mass Effect 1:
There where three armor models. Each model had either a different color, or slightly different stats. This goes back to the "gun" comment at the top of my post. This isn't variety. This is just a hundred armors with random colors. I'd rather have different custom pieces of armor I can swap out (even if it's just a few) over only three types of armor with slightly varying stats.

And the armour for your squad is the bigger joke. There is just no way to customise your squad in any meaningful way.

Except the stats, but yeah, a little bit more freedom would have been nice.

Modifié par 77boy84, 03 février 2010 - 12:32 .

[SorrowAndJoy7]

I disagree, i'm already on my second full playthrough, i can tell i'm going to do more playthroughs this time around than I ever would have been inclined to do in me1.

[Xaenn]

Only issues I would say I had with Dragon Age Origins was it felt like a mmo being played on a console, I feel they could of done much more with it. I also felt the immersion with teammates was shallow, you always had options on what to say, but why make your teammates mad? Why not always choose the perfect choice to gain their bonuses and if you did choose to make them mad you could shove a gift in their face and say LOVE ME. Haha. I did enjoy the game though, don't get me wrong. However the two points did lose almost any replay value for me.

I think I'm the only one who enjoyed the hell out of the inventory from one, it was great, so much customization, customization is a key note, more the better, through my though perspective which could mean little. I'm not saying inventory was perfect, but with some modifications, such as more unique guns, mods ammunition and ways to sort your inventory out while selling it so it wasn't tedious it would of been a perfect system. Down side beyond selling being tedious was Spectre gear > all and it wasn't hard to obtain for how good it was.

Modifié par Xaenn, 03 février 2010 - 12:42 .

[Malanek]

In terms of replay value I think it is easily better. All six classes seem to be more individualy defined meaning more gameplay difference. Plus the squad members wider range of abilities, especially the ones that effect other members, means there are many more combinations.

The game is paced very well as well which encourages replay. I was a bit concerned at first about the scanning after realising you couldn't skip it like ME1 but then the bonus you start with having already finished the game was agood idea and fixed the problem.

Edit : Also looking forward to the difference in heavy weapons.

Modifié par Malanek999, 03 février 2010 - 12:43 .