188 réponses à ce sujet

[ItsFreakinJesus]

Ryzinn wrote...

Oh I know you bioware. You thought "Hey, lets sell out and make a Halo Esque game like everyone else. Cliffy B and his team at epic can do it, why cant we? We'll make tons of moneys lololololol".

Dont get me wrong, I'm not saying you guys went completely over the top with your "Lets turn ME into Halo" rampage. The dialogue for the most part was still pretty ****in, and at least you managed to do the Char Import pretty decently. But holy **** did you screw everything else up.

First of all, You took my RPG and made it into a cross between Gears and Halo. Lets look at the first game,

-Dozens of armors to choose from including the famed Collosus X armor
-Dozens of Weapons to choose from including Spectre Weapons
-Dozens of upgrades to choose from
-Branching skill trees
-60 lvls

1. So you want countless pallate swaps?  Face it, ME1 only had four unique pieces of armor for each gender, the only difference is that they came in a bunch of different colors with stats that barely increased over each other.  And the only reason there were four is because the Medium and Heavy armor looked different on the two genders, while the armor is uniform in ME2. 

ME2 needs more armor pieces, not retarded, uncessary duplicates of armor like Colossus V and Colossus VI, as if there was a big difference between the two.

2. ME1 had 11 unique weapon models in the game, with a bunch of different colors.  ME2 has 19 unique weapons in the game.  Each gun fires differently from each other, that makes it a big step up from ME1.  ME3 could use more weapons, but the system shouldn't go back to how it was in ME1.

3. The upgrades were redundant.  Outside of Medical Interface units, I never even used the upgrade system.  And since characters regenerate health faster than they did in ME1 (hey, guess what, all of the characters regenerated health in ME1 without the armor upgrade), there's no point to it.  And since each piece of armor gives a different stat boost in ME2, it makes armor mods redundant.  Why would I add some silly thing to my suit of armor to boost my shields when I can customize the look of my armor, visibly changing my shoulder pads to achieve the same effect?

4. I agree with you there, somewhat.  ME2 needed more combat skills.  However, the majority of the skills in ME1 were uncessary.  Charm/Intimidate skills weren't needed because even in the first game, getting Paragon and Renegade points made you better at Charm/Intimidate.  Having to increase stats to do something I'm capable of controlling myself (aiming) was dumb, too.  Glad they removed it.

5. KOTOR 1 had a level max of 20.  Was that not hardcore?  Does it matter what the level cap is?  Is getting 20 experience killing an enemy in a game with a cap of 30 any different than killing an enemy and getting 60 EXP for killing an enemy with a cap of 90?  The only difference is that we get the benefit of seeing a large level number.  I'd love to see level 67 on my character in ME2, but I also know that it's not that important in the long run.

[Khavos]

Kalfear wrote...

LOL Phoenix, give it up, hes just bashing RPGs is all.

DA:O was one of the most complexe and original RPGs made in the last decade and anyone that plays RPGs knows this.
Khavos just talking about topics he has no clue about is all!

You're certainly entitled to your opinion.  For my part, I found it to essentially be consolized MMO mechanics in a single-player game.  Interesting characters, at least.  

[spock06]

Akimb0 wrote...

Jonnerz wrote...

Ryzinn wrote...

and most of you arent even reading the post to begin with. Instead you're just skimming through it and saying "ME2 is the best game ever lolololol"

God I hate you guys.

You're looking at both the games through a biased perspective. You support the original without pausing to pinpoint it's major flaws: The lift sequences, the repetitive planets, the fact that earning 60 levels took several months on end... and you refuse to see anything positive in Mass Effect 2. How about the seemless gameplay, the improved combat? But you don't like the new combat. Why? Maybe it's not because it's torn from Gears of War or so fourth, but because it's more challenging?

ME2 isn't the 'best game ever.' Neither is the original. Both are excellent games, and both have flaws. Perhaps you should approach the topic with a more neutral attitude before shouting, 'It's dumbed down for retards!'

Lift sequences were great, more character in one ME1 lift sequence than the entirety of ME2.
Repetative planets replaced by a dumbed down "scanning" mini-game. Awesome. <_<
Level 60 took months on end? No offense but you must have failed HARD at ME1.

Seamless gameplay? Is that why I have loading screens to get to different areas in the Normandy?
Improved combat? You mean taking away all the talent / "power" options I had in ME1?, all the gear?, the better clearer menus?, the utterly stupid "ammo" system?

The only good thing ME2 has going for it in combat, is the location based damage.

I think you missed the point entirely. The combat gameplay IS torn from crap like Gears of War. That's why people don't like it. It's not challenging, it's BORING. Sit behind cover opposite each other and plink off some shots, use a power when it's ready. (Awesome, I only have ONE active power btw, now that the game has been dumbed down, compared to at LEAST 3 the ME1 infiltrator had.) Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to make out ME1 combat was incredible. It wasn't. However ME2 has only improved it with hit locations. Everything else is the same or worse.

I wouldn't call Gears of War "crap".  Have you played it?  It's pretty f*ckin crazy.  The controls are extremely well thought out and smooth, enemy AI is excellent, the weapons are vicious, and the overall experience is pretty visceral.  The more ME2's combat is like that, the better I say.  Gears of War is many things, BORING is certainly not one of them.  Personally, I find the combat in games like Dragon Age to be boring because it has nothing to do with player skill, you just auto attack and hope the dice roll in you favor.

[Phoenixblight]

[quote]Twitchmonkey wrote...

[quote]Kalfear wrote...

DAO was not made for the COnsole market. It was designed to be for the PC. They ported to the console. [/quote]

LOL Phoenix, give it up, hes just bashing RPGs is all.

DA:O was one of the most complexe and original RPGs made in the last decade and anyone that plays RPGs knows this.
Khavos just talking about topics he has no clue about is all![/quote]

I loved DA:O. I loved it because the world was rich, the party was interesting, the tone was dark, the moral choices were complex; having to make sure I don't misspend a skill point so my build is viable and having to sell off my inventory every quest isn't even on the list of things I remember fondly about DA:O. [/quote]


Yeah now in the mood to play but want to wait til the Expansion.

Modifié par Phoenixblight, 02 février 2010 - 08:54 .

[WillieStyle]

Could someone please explain to me how ME2 is "dumbed down" in comparison to ME1?



The gameplay seems more challenging and varied in ME2 than in ME1.

I happen to prefer ME2's story as well but that's subjective. Nevertheless, how would a less interesting/engaging story constitute "dumbing down?" It's not as though it takes much intellect to appreciate either (even though they are both fun). I mean it's not like ME1 was Gravity's Rainbow or something.



Finally, how in heavens name does having tons of weapons - all of which are worse than the Specter VII weapons you could get in the first act of ME1 - make the game "intelligent?"



I can understand the pack-rat personality who likes collecting tons of junk and wading through them to find the occasional Colossus IX armor, but how does that constitute intelligent gameplay?

It didn't take any intelligence to get good armor drops. They were random. It didn't take intelligence to get good weapon mods. They were random. And it didn't take intelligence to figure out the best of anything.



Weapons: Spectre VII or X (depending on level). No real choice here.

Ammo: Tungsten or Shredder (depending on whether you fought Geth or Organics) only 2 real choices here.

Armor: Colossus. No real choice here.

Armor Mod: Medical Exoskeleton X (no real choice here).



And when it came to leveling up skills:

ME1: 12 ranks each increases damage by ~2%. You get a special bonus every 3 levels.

ME2: 4 ranks each increase damage by ~6%. You get a special bonus with every level.



How is one system more "intelligent" than the other.

It was even worse in ME1 because you had to spend points just to be proficient with a weapon meaning you had fewer choices/decisions to make in combat leading to simpler - dare I say "dumber" - gameplay.



I just don't understand these complaints. Perhaps it's because I'm too dumb.

[spock06]

Khavos wrote...

Kalfear wrote...

LOL Phoenix, give it up, hes just bashing RPGs is all.

DA:O was one of the most complexe and original RPGs made in the last decade and anyone that plays RPGs knows this.
Khavos just talking about topics he has no clue about is all!

You're certainly entitled to your opinion.  For my part, I found it to essentially be consolized MMO mechanics in a single-player game.  Interesting characters, at least.  

I agree.  The only high point of Dragon Age for me was the characters and some of the quests.  The graphics and combat were horrible.  It was basically a WoW style of play with a specified tank, dps, and heals.  Except its a lot more fun in WoW.

[Jonnerz]

Akimb0 wrote...

Lift sequences were great, more character in one ME1 lift sequence than the entirety of ME2.
Repetative planets replaced by a dumbed down "scanning" mini-game. Awesome.
Level 60 took months on end? No offense but you must have failed HARD at ME1.

Seamless gameplay? Is that why I have loading screens to get to different areas in the Normandy?
Improved combat? You mean taking away all the talent / "power" options I had in ME1?, all the gear?, the better clearer menus?, the utterly stupid "ammo" system?

The only good thing ME2 has going for it in combat, is the location based damage.

I think you missed the point entirely. The combat gameplay IS torn from crap like Gears of War. That's why people don't like it. It's not challenging, it's BORING. Sit behind cover opposite each other and plink off some shots, use a power when it's ready. (Awesome, I only have ONE active power btw, now that the game has been dumbed down, compared to at LEAST 3 the ME1 infiltrator had.) Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to make out ME1 combat was incredible. It wasn't. However ME2 has only improved it with hit locations. Everything else is the same or worse.

The lift sequences were dull, often silent, and made moving around incredibly slow.
There was scanning on ME1. And the sidequests were boring.
Level 60 took about 3 playthroughs in a row. Assume I was bad at the game if you wish. I don't play non-stop.
The gameplay is seamless and the animations are brilliant. I refer to combat and dialogue. Perhaps the lift sequences were clever in terms of idea, but I prefer the animations. They don't take as long.

Wrong. I like the combat. You can't just generalise the market and expect your point to be valid.
Gears of War being crap is a different matter entirely.
It's boring for you. I reckon it's great you actually have to use cover, instead of charging in and deflecting bullets without a care in the world.

[miltos33]

I generally agree with the OP that this game was shamelessly dumbed down. It is probably the EA effect that developers have to release a new game every year, but to suggest that ME3 should cater to the hardcore fans is just wishful thinking and it's just not gonna happen.

[XyA_DeathKnight]

ItsFreakinJesus wrote...

Does it matter what the level cap is?  Is getting 20 experience killing an enemy in a game with a cap of 30 any different than killing an enemy and getting 60 EXP for killing an enemy with a cap of 90?  The only difference is that we get the benefit of seeing a large level number.  I'd love to see level 67 on my character in ME2, but I also know that it's not that important in the long run.

I have to agree with this also. I finished ME1 with a lvl 38 character and, although I'm sure I did, I don't feel as though I missed out on anything not going all the way to 60.

[Ryzinn]

[quote]LoweGear wrote...

This will be fun...


There were dozens of armors to choose from... whose color schemes you can't even change, and whose only differences performance wise are stats. [/quote]

idc about color schemes, im not some prepubescent girl who cares about matching outfits. And i'm pretty sure you had an easier time mowing down geth in Collosus X then you ever did in N7 armor.

[quote]
[/quote]

[quote]Dozens of weapons differing only in appearance and barely changing stats. Not like it mattered, since when you got Spectre Gear, you won't need any more of those other weapons anyway, since Spectre weapons have the highest overall stats of any weapon in-game. [/quote]

a Spectre Pistol does way more damage then a stilleto IV. This matters, quit acting like it doesnt.



[quote]Which only add incremental advantages that you hardly even notice in game anyway, unless they're game-breaking upgrades like Frictionless Materials[/quote]

They changed the game none the less. ME2 has nothing like this and its sorely missed.

[quote]
[/quote]

[quote]What branching skill trees? All of your skills only advanced till you can no longer sink points into them, which is hardly "branching". If you're referring to needing to drop points into a skill to unlock another skill, guess what ME2 has that too. [/quote]

Regardless, the ME1 skill tree was far more expansive and complex then ME2's half baked skill tree.
[quote]
[quote]-60 lvls[/quote]

So?[/quote]

So we got a bigger skill tree. Dur.



[quote]Armor pieces which you can mix and match to provide a different customized appearance to your armor, along with the ability to change armor color and patterns.[/quote]

With maybe 5-6 different pieces of armor this isnt exactly exciting. I prefered ME1's armor system simply for the fact of different armors and the upgrades you could put into them. Such as advanced health regen or kinetic barriers.

[quote]Also, what's with the fixation for Collosus armor?[/quote]

You call yourself an ME fan? Pfffffffffffffft.







[quote]You liked having too many items in your inventory?[/quote]

No, i didnt, but this couldve easily been fixed with a better delete option or atleast a faster way to sell your junk.






 
[quote]Actually, the Presidium level in ME1 was no larger than the Omega levels in ME2, it only had the appearance of being massive because of the background. And I'd take the more interesting atmosphere and characters of Omega, Illium and the Zakera Wards over the sterile Presidium in ME1. [/quote]

im aware of what backrounds are bro. The presidium and wards in the original ME1 provided more places to explore, more things to do, more side quests to undertake, then anything  ME2's zakeera ward provided. Thus it was bigger.


[quote]Going back to the side quests, in ME1 the sidequests and planets were huge and you were basically just tossed into these worlds with no sense of where to go or what to do. You had to figure it out for yourself. [/quote]

[quote]Which was a rather boring and repetitive process, considering that most of the planets changed only visually, with nothing really interesting in them at all. [/quote]

You're missing the point. I'm aware that most planets looked the same and had copy/pasted objects and quests. My overall point was that you were atleast granted the sense of "Wtf where am I supposed to go". Unlike ME2.

[quote]
I'd rather have the more interesting and more varied set pieces of ME2 as opposed to the, as you said yourself, "dull and copy/pasted" sidequests of ME1. Whether it be sending out Shepard by himself with no squadmates on a tilting starship, or navigating through thick smog fighting against enemies you can barely see, or rushing against time to save a starship from crashing, or even just reminiscing the days with the Normandy's wreck. [/quote]

Trust me, I prefered the sidquests in ME2 over ME1 but that doesnt mean they're anything less then just the standard "Pick your mission, go from point a to point b, view the misson complete screen (which is also retarded btw) and go back to the normandy. Not to mention theres only 8-12 of these sidequests out there.  

Modifié par Ryzinn, 02 février 2010 - 08:59 .

[Kalfear]

haberman13 wrote...

100% agree with the OP

Dumbed down for people who don't even appreciate this kind of game.

My "tardo" friends who like COD/Halo etc. don't like ME2, it has too much story and dialogue, yet this game was made for them... but they dont want it. 

Strange

LOL, I predicted this before game even released!
Hardcore Shooter players want all action with as little interuption as possible so it was easy to guess they were not going to take to ME2 as to much talking and standing around!
Everyone assums ME3 is going to sell great but its sold over 2 million copies but over 1 million of those are RPG fans from the first game and there is no guarentee those fans going to buy part 3 now the franchise a shooter with a story franchise and not a RPG anymore.
So in the end, Bioware may not sell more copies by going to new fanbase because they probably lost a good portion of their old base!
RPG fans are not known for forgiving and forgetting substandard work. They expect you to deliver everytime at bat!

ME2 might of ran off their majority playerbase when they decided to abandon its RPG fans completely in game!

ME1 sold what? 1.5 million I think it was, ME2 sold 2 million. That means they only picked up a extra 500k. They definately stand to lose more then they gained in ME3 if you go by the numbers.

[Khavos]

WillieStyle wrote...

Could someone please explain to me how ME2 is "dumbed down" in comparison to ME1?

Well...

I'm playing on Insanity currently.  I've turned off automatic power usage for my squad members.  I'm just about to beat the game and have never used a tech or biotic power.  I've died twice.  

It may not be the best example of dumbing down out there, but for me, it clearly demonstrates that the game isn't much of an RPG. 

[ItsFreakinJesus]

Ryuuichi009 wrote...

I think that's the issue. RPG fans are used to combat being based off their CHARACTER's skill while shooter/action people are used to combat being based of THEIR skill.

Frankly I suck at aiming and have ****ty eyesight so I prefer combat to be based off my character's skill (who doesn't have to worry about their eyes seeing something 20 feet away like its 60 feet away.)Than mine (not to mention I have a weird twitching condition when I get excited which screws me over when playing shooter games in general.) 

They should include auto-aim into the next game.  The game already has slight auto aim, but with it increased, the game would adjust so you can line up shots on your enemies without having to be exact.  There's plenty of shooter games with this option, some with a stronger auto aim than others, so I don't see why it shouldn't be in ME3.  And on the plus side, people like you wouldn't have to spend points on a menu in order to get it to work.

XyA_DeathKnight wrote...

ItsFreakinJesus wrote...

Does
it matter what the level cap is?  Is getting 20 experience killing an
enemy in a game with a cap of 30 any different than killing an enemy and
getting 60 EXP for killing an enemy with a cap of 90?  The only
difference is that we get the benefit of seeing a large level number. 
I'd love to see level 67 on my character in ME2, but I also know that
it's not that important in the long run.

I have to
agree with this also. I finished ME1 with a lvl 38 character and,
although I'm sure I did, I don't feel as though I missed out on anything
not going all the way to 60.

The increased level cap is
only good for New game + and on higher difficulties.  Other than that,
there's really no need.

[grumpymooselion]

Treekodar wrote...

At least make a tl;dr version.

Agree or Disagree with the original poster at your whim, but the tl;dr nonsense has always and only been a sign of one thing: "indolence."

[Juztinb42]

Agreed OP, I think a mix between ME1 and ME2 would be good.  ME1 is an RPG, ME2 is a shooter.  I want an RPS.

I still don't understand why BioWare decided to scrap everything that we didn't like instead of just fixing the stuff.  Both games are good in their own rights, but they are just so different that it's hard to believe they are in the same franchise.

[ITSSEXYTIME]

ME1 had 4 weapons.  Different pistols did not function differently from each other.  There as maybe 2-3 pistol models used in the entire game.  Oh, but there was a lot of skins for them.

While I do kind of wish that we had more weapons and armour pieces in ME2, you're an idiot if you think ME1 actually had more variety.  It had the illusion of variety via the inventory system, but mechanically and visually there was rarely a difference between many of the items while as in ME2 your carnifex hand cannon performs drastically different from your predator pistol and you can create a variety of appearances via the armour system. (Nevermind that you can mix and match armour stats too, creating dozens of combinations)

Leveling in ME2 is significantly better than ME1.  There may be less "paths" but each level of a skill gained is far more significant than the "+2% accuracy with assault rifle" crap that was in ME1. 

[WillieStyle]

Kalfear wrote...

ME1 sold what? 1.5 million I think it was, ME2 sold 2 million. That means they only picked up a extra 500k. They definately stand to lose more then they gained in ME3 if you go by the numbers.

This is particularly ironic coming from someone who prides themselves as being part of an "intelligent" RPG elite.
The innumeracy shown here is breathtaking.

[Fujin05]

...let's just hope that they use their well earned money of ME2 to make an excellent ME3!

I'm still hoping...

Modifié par Fujin05, 02 février 2010 - 09:05 .

[Liablecocksman]

haberman13 joked...

Reason: mass appeal

Problem: ME2 still has too much dialogue to be appealing to the jack-o's that enjoy simple games.

Solution: remove all dialogue from ME3, provide a surface level corridor shooter.

Haha, that had me laughing!

Nice one... Let us cross our fingers and hope it isn't going to happen

[laststarfighter]

The OP has hit the nail on the head. Great post.

[Kalfear]

WillieStyle wrote...

Kalfear wrote...

ME1 sold what? 1.5 million I think it was, ME2 sold 2 million. That means they only picked up a extra 500k. They definately stand to lose more then they gained in ME3 if you go by the numbers.

This is particularly ironic coming from someone who prides themselves as being part of an "intelligent" RPG elite.
The innumeracy shown here is breathtaking.

Color me stupid but I dont get what troll boy saying here?

Anyone else?

Is not 1.5 > 0.5 ?

Now granted I havent been in school for a few decades and not up on new math but pretty such my equation is correct

[Jaysonie]

Kalfear wrote...

haberman13 wrote...

100% agree with the OP

Dumbed down for people who don't even appreciate this kind of game.

My "tardo" friends who like COD/Halo etc. don't like ME2, it has too much story and dialogue, yet this game was made for them... but they dont want it. 

Strange

LOL, I predicted this before game even released!
Hardcore Shooter players want all action with as little interuption as possible so it was easy to guess they were not going to take to ME2 as to much talking and standing around!
Everyone assums ME3 is going to sell great but its sold over 2 million copies but over 1 million of those are RPG fans from the first game and there is no guarentee those fans going to buy part 3 now the franchise a shooter with a story franchise and not a RPG anymore.
So in the end, Bioware may not sell more copies by going to new fanbase because they probably lost a good portion of their old base!
RPG fans are not known for forgiving and forgetting substandard work. They expect you to deliver everytime at bat!

ME2 might of ran off their majority playerbase when they decided to abandon its RPG fans completely in game!

ME1 sold what? 1.5 million I think it was, ME2 sold 2 million. That means they only picked up a extra 500k. They definately stand to lose more then they gained in ME3 if you go by the numbers.

The arrogance in this post is astounding. Or you do speak for rpg and casual shooter fans along with seeing into the future.