154 réponses à ce sujet

[The Black Ghost]

I think this is an honest complaint. I mean, there really was no reason not to have the ability to crouch (all of your squadmates can). There are still buttons that can be mapped on the xbox 360 (hold down B to crouch, for instance).



THere is no logic behind taking it out except that players "dont need it", even though it would be very helpful in many situations where using cover is more dangerous than just standing behind something to minimize your exposure during a firefight. Also, it looks cool.



There really areant a lot of glitches in this game, i see no reason why they couldnt take the time to add in a simple animation and map it to a button.

[Vena_86]

Maybe the OP overreacted but he has a point. When you play a shooter, you can quickly crouch which reduces your size as a target and usually improves your accuracy. And ME2s combat is just that, a shooter. BioWare wanted to boost the shooter experience, which they did, but this (little) thing is still missing. There should be a choice between taking cover and a fast reaction crouch + headshot/ability depending on the situation.

Its one of those things which could be added via patch or add-on.

Modifié par Vena_86, 03 février 2010 - 05:55 .

[InterKnight]

tetracycloide wrote...
Good example.  Shifting manually occasionally necessary.  Poor road conditions.  Steep inclines.  Heavy cargo.  All require use of low gears outside of mere ordinal transitions.  Crouch more than a transition to low cover.  Required there, yes.  Also good if caught to far from cover.  Not as good, no, but useful.  Better for aim.  Likely cause of removal: reduces need for cover.  Breaks design goal.

First off, I love having Dr. Solus's input on the matter.

Second off, I don't think it's the devs being lazy, or trying to screw you over.  In fact, I think removal of crouch was more to require you to play tactically (there is nothing tactically sound about crouching in the middle of a room, or crouching when running away from flankers - you move more slowly, making you easier to kill).  Many of the changes to combat from ME1 made it more important to use tactics.  AI that flanks you is a huge example of this.  If you can't figure out  a way to avoid being killed by them, you need to work on your tactics.

It also emphasizes the point that you can't afford to move slowly when you're under fire.  If someone is shooting at you, and they come around behind you, you want the get-up-and-go to get to cover from them, not the very slight protection that crouching offers.

[LoweGear]

InterKnight wrote...
It also emphasizes the point that you can't afford to move slowly when you're under fire.  If someone is shooting at you, and they come around behind you, you want the get-up-and-go to get to cover from them, not the very slight protection that crouching offers.

This... is quite true, even IRL. I've had my brother (who serves in the army as a Lieutenant) emphasize the importance of speed in combat: you don't move between cover crouching unless you have cover or concealment to hide behind in the first place, you dash. You don't see soldiers crouching slowly from cover to cover, they have one person cover with their weapons in the direction of possible enemy contact while the other runs to cover (aka the Bounding Overwatch). Or if alone, soldiers are trained to RUN to cover in a firefight.

[EnterGodMode]

Here is the deal. people say that you should be in cover, but taking cover does not control the enemy, you can't guarantee that. That also includes the time and place factor. "Wrong time, Wrong Place, better LUCK next time"



People who say just stay in cover are ignoring that factor. sometimes you have to move out, A waist level cover may be available to cover one direaction of fire while your dead open to the other. you might as well be able to move from cover with the crouch option.



Also, Taking Coer does not mean Tactical. Tactical comes with strategy and thinking. Stationary cover is pop-and-shoot. the more flanking involved the more thaught and strategy hits play. Crouching can offer a wider variety of ways to move from cover to cover. more options means more tactics.



If you are dead open you will run to cover, but if you can crouch to block gunfire from the left while returning fire straight ahead.



Adding the function will be an option for the players to do.



honesly cover will be used. games tweak cover systems so that you dont take damage while in cover. your character may be exposed, but the cover comes with hitbox immunity. crouching behind cover or standing next to a wall is not as effective as actual cover in this game. Crouching wont reduce the need for cover



BTW Learn from the Gears of War "Roadie Run". IRL people will duck there heads down while sprinting to cover, at peak speed they are tall, but in and out of cover they will lower down.

[TrojanGuy]

XxRTEKxX wrote...

Are you serious? ****ing screw ups man. How the **** are they going to leave out the ability to crouch? I don't give a flying **** about the stupid ass cover system. I want to crouch.

Sometimes there isn't an object in which I can take cover on, and crouching minimizes yourself as a target. It's a natural thing to do in a firefight.

Wow...

[salarianSniper]

soon people will complain "i cant blind fire in this game wtf" just enjoy what they gave you.

[spock06]

it seems ME2 made great strides in combat, imitating Gears of War in particular. so why not take it a step further and really bring all the refinements from that system into the game? crouching is a useful skill. moving smoothly from cover to cover would be nice, as would swat turns.



the point is, why REMOVE the ability to crouch? it was useful in ME1, especially when fighting large enemies who could shoot down at you. plus i felt like improved accuracy

[ScroguBlitzen]

Crouching is absolutely not moot because of low cover.

There are places in the game where the ability to manually crouch would aid your survivability significantly.

The most obvious example is when rescuing the ship where geth come up at you from a single stairwell. If you use the cover near the stairs, then whenever you come up to shoot your head pops straight up and you get shot by everyone at the bottom of the stairs. IF you can crouch, then you simply crouch behind the wall, and move out to the right a little bit so you can look down the stairwell and attack those coming up it. In this way you only expose yourself to the enemies on the stairwell, the rest in the room at the bottom cannot hit you.

Whoever made the decision that we didn't need crouch failed. For those who don't ever use crouch...fine, don't use it, but don't tell those of us that know how and when to use it that it's not incredibly useful (as well as aiding in role playing immersion... especially for an Infiltrator ffs).

[MagnusTokai]

Felix Golden wrote...

If you get flanked i doubt you will want to try to duck walk away from the people that have a clear line of fire on you, you wanna run your ass to the next bit of cover and kill the flankers.

-puts this thread up on the wall of worst threads ever, along with the alistar in space and garrus armor threads-

The cover system is flawed and I would rather have manual crouch then the broken cover system. A cover system where you automatically stand up when you turn around to shoot at a flanking enemy only to expose your back to 10 enemies or when a certain barricades walls are not programmed to be used as cover so you get shot up because you aren't crouched.

I rather have the ability to manually use cover and shoot while exposing only half my body rather than the current system where the character leans out his whole body to shoot.

[MagnusTokai]

InterKnight wrote...

tetracycloide wrote...
Good example.  Shifting manually occasionally necessary.  Poor road conditions.  Steep inclines.  Heavy cargo.  All require use of low gears outside of mere ordinal transitions.  Crouch more than a transition to low cover.  Required there, yes.  Also good if caught to far from cover.  Not as good, no, but useful.  Better for aim.  Likely cause of removal: reduces need for cover.  Breaks design goal.

First off, I love having Dr. Solus's input on the matter.

Second off, I don't think it's the devs being lazy, or trying to screw you over.  In fact, I think removal of crouch was more to require you to play tactically (there is nothing tactically sound about crouching in the middle of a room, or crouching when running away from flankers - you move more slowly, making you easier to kill).  Many of the changes to combat from ME1 made it more important to use tactics.  AI that flanks you is a huge example of this.  If you can't figure out  a way to avoid being killed by them, you need to work on your tactics.

It also emphasizes the point that you can't afford to move slowly when you're under fire.  If someone is shooting at you, and they come around behind you, you want the get-up-and-go to get to cover from them, not the very slight protection that crouching offers.

Except for the mentally impaired. Nobody in favor of crounching has said anything about crouching in the middle of the field with no cover.

One flanking enemy is easy to deal with if you are crouched behind cover. The problem with this system is if you turn around to deal with that enemy the game decides you want to stand up from cover and expose your back to a horde of enemies and not just the one flanking enemy.

[Malanek]

If you have enemies in front and behind you and low cover in front, it would be useful to shoot the enemies behind you while crouched. I don't think it is a big issue due to the fact that the way the encounters in ME2 are designed this doesn't happen often, but it does on occasion.

[aberdash]

In the few playthroughs I've done I do not remember any point in which full height cover was not in the immediate vicinity of me during combat.

[SinHound]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Crouching was made moot because of low cover. Some folks are talking as if low cover is the only cover in a combat. It is not. You can also take cover behind higher objects like walls. The ability to crouch is not what defines this game or any shooter.

The ability to crouch behind said higher objects, and take a lower profile, is the logical course of action in a combat situation. It's not made moot.

[aberdash]

And the only thing you gain from that is a very small increase in accuracy.

[tetracycloide]

InterKnight wrote...
Second off, I don't think it's the devs being lazy, or trying to screw you over.

Did not say lazy or malicious.  Meant to imply narrow-minded.  Tunnel vision for one-size-fits all solution vis a vis cover.  Diction in bioware post appears to confirm position.  Trouble is crouching can be the answer.  Must first ask the right question.

[SethSteiner]

I was irritated that there is no crouch function and I am still irritated. Okay, I can`t jump, that is one thing but come on! Yes there is cover now but in nearly 99% of shooters you can crouch and most of the tactic rpgs also allow to crouch. No matter if there is cover or not but this is an essential thing of handling with guns and I would like to aim better with crouching.



And in the end:

You don`t need to make EVERY level with cover. That is not only unrealistic, it repeats itself. Having a crouching option would also allow to remove cover here and there. And it would be nice if more cover is destroyable.



Cover is cool, I love this new feature but I also love to crouch.

[Fireclown2020]

LoweGear wrote...

There is no crouch in ME2 as far as I know. Given that your character already crouches when in the appropriate cover height, having it done manually is sort of a moot point.

I do have to disagree with you, sorry.

I would really, really like them to put the crouch back into the game.

In the first game you were able to crouch before you got into proper cover, this was done so your character was a smaller target and harder to shoot while trying to reach cover, it also forced, sometimes, certain character classes that you faught into hand-to-hand combat which was great for the Adept class.

Crouching before you go into cover also ment that if you pulled back on the controls when you were in cover you (by mistake or on purpose) would stay crouched and you were still less of a target.  Means that when I am crouched in ME2 and pull back that I don't automatically stand up in the line of fire, which is something I am sure all people don't want to do.

Lastly, the couching effect also ment that you had a better aim which was more realistic, added to the game play and RP of the game.  All these things I do beleive would have been good to keep for the second game.  Just another thing ME2 lacks which spoils the trilogy in my opinion.

FC

[TuringPoint]

The ability to crouch would be nice, however. If you could click a joystick to duck, it wouldn't hurt the gameplay in any way to allow it, and some times the ability to duck would've been quite handy.

[Sean]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Crouching was made moot because of low cover. Some folks are talking as if low cover is the only cover in a combat. It is not. You can also take cover behind higher objects like walls. The ability to crouch is not what defines this game or any shooter.

but it helps more and would be made a lot more useful in areas that lack cover also making weapons more accurate and would make areas not too obvious for fights because of all the low walls, crates, and cover (which is the cover system is pretty buggy in itself)

Modifié par RX_Sean_XI, 03 février 2010 - 08:24 .

[MoonChildTheUnholy]

I have to say this was one of the things i would never think being taken from the game. Seriously what if i just want to try and stay low while going to cover? what if want to crouch for a long sniper shot out of cover? it makes no sense as this is a basic character move also.



Bioware disappointed in a lot of aspects about ME2 but this one is just well.. wow.

[Incognito_Panda]

Still miss it abit every noe and then. Gears of War is the only game that has managed to make a good combat system in TPSs. Uncharted 2 wasn't bad, but if BW wants better combat system, they should look at Gears, hell even copy. It's sad to say, but its true.

[GlassRain]

I agree with OP, crouch should be brought back for ME3. I'm not going to stand on a soap box and preach but its useful. Not saying that removing it ruins the games by any means, just its a shooter.. and shooters need crouch.



I do like the evolved cover system though. Feels much tighter though I'd like to see "mount" assigned to a key other than spacebar. The few times I died in my Hardcore run were due to my accidental hurdling of cover after being knocked away from it by biotics.

[InterKnight]

tetracycloide wrote...

InterKnight wrote...
Second off, I don't think it's the devs being lazy, or trying to screw you over.

Did not say lazy or malicious.  Meant to imply narrow-minded.  Tunnel vision for one-size-fits all solution vis a vis cover.  Diction in bioware post appears to confirm position.  Trouble is crouching can be the answer.  Must first ask the right question.

Oh I wasn't directing the entire post at you, Dr. Solus, rather I quoted you to show my appreciation.

Also, given the well thought-out responses to my post, I can see where you all are coming from.  I am not sure if I would use a crouch feature, but I agree that it can't hurt to put it back in.