339 réponses à ce sujet

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

SmokePants wrote...

It's a simple fact that players take the easy route over the fun route 99% of the time. BAD combat design is allowing the player to be lazy and fall into a robotic rut. Good combat design is encouraging the player to live in each moment. That's what ammo restrictions do and that's what thermal cooldown didn't do.

****ty AI scaling is what ruins the fun and breaks a system. "Ammo restrictions" (and I am glad that you have called it for what it truly is, since Bioware has tried to pass off that this is somehow an 'improvement' via the codex) breaks lore and is completely unecessary. Tweak the first system, don't completely dump it. I feel like I am playing Rainbow Six Las Vegas 2 half of the time, minus blindfire with the addition of casting.

And why do you care if a player gets to be lazy? It's a singleplayer game, let them play how they want! You can't throw out a subjective qualifier, such as "live in the moment", and not even bother to define it. What does that term even mean? Am I not "living in the moment" when I play ME 1?

[kennyme2]

Since I usually use the Revenant, ammo isn't a problem. But when I look at weapons like the Carnifex and shotgun, it really begs the question of who would decide that having limited ammo with higher power is better than having unlimited ammo at lower power?



It doesn't matter how powerful your heatsink gun is when it can't shoot at all.



Gameplay wise, ammo makes the game funner IMO and lroe wise, it is explained well enough.

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

kennyme2 wrote...

Gameplay wise, ammo makes the game funner IMO and lroe wise, it is explained well enough.

Lore-wise, it's not explained at all. The codex entry should read "the galactic community universally felt that being able to put two dampners in their upgradeable weapons was too easy, so as a whole the "geth heat sinks" were adopted to make all ME2 Guns crappier than their predecessors."

Modifié par Dr. Peter Venkman, 09 février 2010 - 05:20 .

[RiouHotaru]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

kennyme2 wrote...

Gameplay wise, ammo makes the game funner IMO and lroe wise, it is explained well enough.

Lore-wise, it's not explained at all. The codex entry should read "the galactic community universally felt that being able to put two dampners in their upgradeable weapons was too easy, so as a whole the "geth heat sinks" were adopted to make all ME Guns crappier than their predecessors."

RTFM.  I mean seriously, it explains the system perfectly.  Normal soldiers and what not didn't have access to Spectre X weapons or Dual Frictionless Materials X, so to improve the rate of continuous fire in the weapons used by the Alliance, they reverse-engineered the thermal clip system used by the Geth, which then allowed for Soldiers to only have to wait 1-2 seconds between burst-fires, rather than 5-6 seconds when their guns overheated.

Also, when you run out of heatsinks, it's not that your gun is in a state of permanent "overheat", it's that the gun has a safety mechanism that keeps you from firing in order to make sure you don't cause the weapon to overheat and damage the internal mechanisms, which would impair the arm's performance.  Is this really that difficult for you guys to get?

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

kennyme2 wrote...

Gameplay wise, ammo makes the game funner IMO and lroe wise, it is explained well enough.

Lore-wise, it's not explained at all. The codex entry should read "the galactic community universally felt that being able to put two dampners in their upgradeable weapons was too easy, so as a whole the "geth heat sinks" were adopted to make all ME Guns crappier than their predecessors."

RTFM.  I mean seriously, it explains the system perfectly.  Normal soldiers and what not didn't have access to Spectre X weapons or Dual Frictionless Materials X, so to improve the rate of continuous fire in the weapons used by the Alliance, they reverse-engineered the thermal clip system used by the Geth, which then allowed for Soldiers to only have to wait 1-2 seconds between burst-fires, rather than 5-6 seconds when their guns overheated.

Also, when you run out of heatsinks, it's not that your gun is in a state of permanent "overheat", it's that the gun has a safety mechanism that keeps you from firing in order to make sure you don't cause the weapon to overheat and damage the internal mechanisms, which would impair the arm's performance.  Is this really that difficult for you guys to get?

Your argument is perfect, aside from conveniently ignoring that you don't need "Spectre X weapons or Dual Frictionless Materals X" to avoid overheating a weapon in ME. ME 1 guns are FAR more effective than the guns in ME 2. I like the additional "you can't shoot the gun without a heatsink because it will damage the internal mechanisms" which happened all the time in ME 1...wait. These aren't heat sinks, since that implies being able to be reused once cooled off. They are glorified ammunition counters and nothing more. This more of "making up the story and removing lore as you go along", which is what the codex reads like.

Modifié par Dr. Peter Venkman, 09 février 2010 - 05:30 .

[That One Display Name]

blank1 wrote...

If you people using snipers don't like how the starting sniper rifles have so little ammo, just use the sniper rifle you pick up during the Thane mission. No, not as strong per shot as the starting sniper rifle, but if you aim for the head, you end up having way more kills per ammo load. The Widow ought to have that little ammo, too. That thing is a damned heavy weapon, not a fkn sniper. It freakin' one shots Harbinger lolz.

have you ever played on insanity?

[Gar_Logan]

I feel like saying this for probably the 200000000000th time in this thread.

EDIT: Not heatsinks dammit. Thermal clips. This is what I get for multi tasking.

Good: Faster reloading.
Bad: Limited ammunition.

Clarification: Cooling down in ME1 was much longer than 5 seconds.
Even more: It would probably take around 5-10 minutes or longer for something heated to that temperature if you wanted it to be any more realistic. Or you dump the gun in water for 5 seconds.

Probable best way to fix it: Best of both worlds. Instead of a whole "lore" change, the heatsinks should have been added in as a...feature. I guess. If you are out of heatsinks, you keep the ones you have in, and it acts like it does in ME1. If you do have heatsinks, it's faster to "reload" or pop them instead of waiting time for it to cool down. (Which I remind you, would be around much longer than 5 seconds if you want it realistic.) The only reason this was implemented was to give combat a more tense and tactical air, and it's a lot easier to reload in 1 second than it is to stay in cover while a heavy mech is coming out you waiting for your damn gun to cool down.

Especially because it eliminated that damn ability to overheat weapons that Geth love to spam.

As for squad ammo, there are so many people on here complaining about ammo is scarce for them, it would be a ***** to have to find ammo for your squad too. I mean heat sinks.

Also, hi. I'm going to the local slang translator to figure out what RTFM is.

Modifié par Gar_Logan, 09 février 2010 - 05:29 .

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

Gar_Logan wrote...

I feel like saying this for probably the 200000000000th time in this thread.

Good: Faster reloading.
Bad: Limited ammunition.

Clarification: Cooling down in ME1 was much longer than 5 seconds.
Even more: It would probably take around 5-10 minutes or longer for something heated to that temperature if you wanted it to be any more realistic. Or you dump the gun in water for 5 seconds.

Probable best way to fix it: Best of both worlds. Instead of a whole "lore" change, the heatsinks should have been added in as a...feature. I guess. If you are out of heatsinks, you keep the ones you have in, and it acts like it does in ME1. If you do have heatsinks, it's faster to "reload" or pop them instead of waiting time for it to cool down. (Which I remind you, would be around much longer than 5 seconds if you want it realistic.) The only reason this was implemented was to give combat a more tense and tactical air, and it's a lot easier to reload in 1 second than it is to stay in cover while a heavy mech is coming out you waiting for your damn gun to cool down.

Especially because it eliminated that damn ability to overheat weapons that Geth love to spam.

As for squad ammo, there are so many people on here complaining about ammo is scarce for them, it would be a ***** to have to find ammo for your squad too. I mean heat sinks.

Also, hi. I'm going to the local slang translator to figure out what RTFM is.

This would have been the perfect combination and was actually what I was expecting the game to be like.

RTFM = Read the ****ing Manual

[Schneidend]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

Your argument is perfect, aside from conveniently ignoring that you don't need "Spectre X weapons or Dual Frictionless Materals X" to avoid overheating a weapon in ME. ME 1 guns are FAR more effective than the guns in ME 2. I like the additional "you can't shoot the gun without a heatsink because it will damage the internal mechanisms" which happened all the time in ME 1...wait. These aren't heat sinks, they are ammunition counters.

As per the codex entry, you don't fire as quickly if you're worried about overheating, and the side that lays down the most slugs the fastest usually wins. A firefight will be decided long before the fact that you theoretically have thousands of rounds or that you only have so many thermal clips ever become a factor.

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

Schneidend wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

Your argument is perfect, aside from conveniently ignoring that you don't need "Spectre X weapons or Dual Frictionless Materals X" to avoid overheating a weapon in ME. ME 1 guns are FAR more effective than the guns in ME 2. I like the additional "you can't shoot the gun without a heatsink because it will damage the internal mechanisms" which happened all the time in ME 1...wait. These aren't heat sinks, they are ammunition counters.

As per the codex entry, you don't fire as quickly if you're worried about overheating, and the side that lays down the most slugs the fastest usually wins. A firefight will be decided long before the fact that you theoretically have thousands of rounds or that you only have so many thermal clips ever become a factor.

I know what the codex states and I know very well it is paraphrasing what the Germans discovered when they went to design the STG-44 during WWII, or why the U.S.A. switched from the M14. More bullets going towards the enemy means a higher suppression rate and being able to out maneuver, I get that. However when it comes to Mass Effect, the guns from the first game kick the guns from the second's ass for the reason that guns don't use heat sinks, they use ammunition. That's all that there really is to it.

Modifié par Dr. Peter Venkman, 09 février 2010 - 05:32 .

[Arijharn]

The reasons I didn't like it are:

1) If I have to be hamstrung by it, why is it only I that is hamstrung? No one else seems to be.
2) Why couldn't we have an option to just letting the heat sink passively cool off after time (aka the first one), why must we eject it like ammo.
3) Going back to number 1, I'm all for strategic options, but only if I'm not the only one being forced to act strategic.
4) It's not so much as Lore as it is consistency between the Mass Effect universe.

[Gar_Logan]

You call it ammunition for the sole reason it doesn't let you fire if you don't have any more thermal clips.



....Why am I here? I like the new system, for the most part. Could use some tweaking to get just right, but otherwise, I enjoyed it. I loved that glitch when you got the weapon achievements in ME1 where your guns stay overheated FOREVER until you had to reload your game. Made fighting Saren SO MUCH FUN!

[RiouHotaru]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

kennyme2 wrote...

Gameplay wise, ammo makes the game funner IMO and lroe wise, it is explained well enough.

Lore-wise, it's not explained at all. The codex entry should read "the galactic community universally felt that being able to put two dampners in their upgradeable weapons was too easy, so as a whole the "geth heat sinks" were adopted to make all ME Guns crappier than their predecessors."

RTFM.  I mean seriously, it explains the system perfectly.  Normal soldiers and what not didn't have access to Spectre X weapons or Dual Frictionless Materials X, so to improve the rate of continuous fire in the weapons used by the Alliance, they reverse-engineered the thermal clip system used by the Geth, which then allowed for Soldiers to only have to wait 1-2 seconds between burst-fires, rather than 5-6 seconds when their guns overheated.

Also, when you run out of heatsinks, it's not that your gun is in a state of permanent "overheat", it's that the gun has a safety mechanism that keeps you from firing in order to make sure you don't cause the weapon to overheat and damage the internal mechanisms, which would impair the arm's performance.  Is this really that difficult for you guys to get?

Your argument is perfect, aside from conveniently ignoring that you don't need "Spectre X weapons or Dual Frictionless Materals X" to avoid overheating a weapon in ME. ME 1 guns are FAR more effective than the guns in ME 2. I like the additional "you can't shoot the gun without a heatsink because it will damage the internal mechanisms" which happened all the time in ME 1...wait. These aren't heat sinks, since that implies being able to be reused once cooled off. They are glorified ammunition counters and nothing more. This more of "making up the story and removing lore as you go along", which is what the codex reads like.

How are the guns in ME1 more effective?  Assuming you're using standard default weapons, you can only fire for a few seconds, before you have to wait 2-4 seconds for the heat to dissapate, before you start shooting again.  In ME2, pressing the X button to "reload" takes a second, at most, and you can start shooting again.  Overall, your ROF is MUCH greater with ME2 weapons than ME1, which is explained in the lore as the reason they switched.

Also, do you have any idea how hot those sinks get?  In his loyalty mission, Zaeed uses the heat from one to ignite fuel to blow someone/something up.  That's ridiculously hot!  Heat also disappates slowly.  So whatever substance is in those heatsinks won't cool down anytime.  Or the substance, once heated up, is useless for dissapating additional heat, and therefore has to be replaced.  The counter only refers to the number of shots you can fire before the heatsink can't absorb any more heat.  It has NOTHING to do with "ammo".  The developers simply called it "ammo" as a generalization and all-purpose term.

Edit: Also, they tried hybrid systems.  Several of the old tech demos involved them using a different system.  In several interviews they state that they experimented with multiple systems before coming to the conclusion that the current one was the best.

Modifié par RiouHotaru, 09 février 2010 - 05:42 .

[That One Display Name]

Cpl_Facehugger wrote...

Grumpy-Mcfart wrote...

I only dislike that my thermal clip doesn't cool on its own when I'm not fighting

This. This this this. I downloaded a PC mod which makes it cool down when not in use and I now greatly enjoy ME2's combat, while before it was kind of lackluster. 

you lucky bastard...

[Schneidend]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

I know what the codex states and I know very well it is paraphrasing what the Germans discovered when they went to design the STG-44 during WWII, or why the U.S.A. switched from the M14. More bullets going towards the enemy means a higher suppression rate and being able to out maneuver, I get that. However when it comes to Mass Effect, the guns from the first game kick the guns from the second's ass for the reason that guns don't use heat sinks, they use ammunition. That's all that there really is to it.

But if a group of guys with ME2 guns fought a group of guys with ME1 guns, the ME2 guys would win long before ammunition ever became an issue...

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

Gar_Logan wrote...

You call it ammunition for the sole reason it doesn't let you fire if you don't have any more thermal clips.

You can't fire a gun when you run out of...what is it called...ammunition. I didn't have any additional heat sinks in ME 1...why could I fire my weapon repeatedly after it overheated back then?

RiouHotaru wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

RiouHotaru
wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

kennyme2
wrote...

Gameplay wise, ammo makes the game funner IMO and lroe
wise, it is explained well enough.

Lore-wise, it's not
explained at all. The codex entry should read "the galactic community
universally felt that being able to put two dampners in their
upgradeable weapons was too easy, so as a whole the "geth heat sinks"
were adopted to make all ME Guns crappier than their predecessors."

RTFM. 
I mean seriously, it explains the system perfectly.  Normal soldiers
and what not didn't have access to Spectre X weapons or Dual
Frictionless Materials X, so to improve the rate of continuous fire in
the weapons used by the Alliance, they reverse-engineered the thermal
clip system used by the Geth, which then allowed for Soldiers to only
have to wait 1-2 seconds between burst-fires, rather than 5-6 seconds
when their guns overheated.

Also, when you run out of heatsinks,
it's not that your gun is in a state of permanent "overheat", it's that
the gun has a safety mechanism that keeps you from firing in order to
make sure you don't cause the weapon to overheat and damage the internal
mechanisms, which would impair the arm's performance.  Is this really
that difficult for you guys to get?
images/spacer.gifimages/spacer.gif

Your argument is perfect, aside from
conveniently ignoring that you don't need "Spectre X weapons or Dual
Frictionless Materals X" to avoid overheating a weapon in ME. ME 1 guns
are FAR more effective than the guns in ME 2. I like the additional "you
can't shoot the gun without a heatsink because it will damage the
internal mechanisms" which happened all the time in ME 1...wait. These
aren't heat sinks, since that implies being able to be reused once
cooled off. They are glorified ammunition counters and nothing more.
This more of "making up the story and removing lore as you go along",
which is what the codex reads like.

How are the guns
in ME1 more effective?  Assuming you're using standard default weapons,
you can only fire for a few seconds, before you have to wait 2-4 seconds
for the heat to dissapate, before you start shooting again.  In ME2,
pressing the X button to "reload" takes a second, at most, and you can
start shooting again.  Overall, your ROF is MUCH greater with ME2
weapons than ME1, which is explained in the lore as the reason they
switched.

Also, do you have any idea how hot those sinks get?  In
his loyalty mission, Zaeed uses the heat from one to ignite fuel to
blow someone/something up.  That's ridiculously hot!  Heat also
disappates slowly.  So whatever substance is in those heatsinks won't
cool down anytime.  Or the substance, once heated up, is useless for
dissapating additional heat, and therefore has to be replaced.  The
counter only refers to the number of shots you can fire before the
heatsink can't absorb any more heast.
images/spacer.gifimages/spacer.gif

The rate of fire =/= effectiveness. I know that is what the codex states however that is not the way things work in ME 2 given that we know have to use weapons for "special" situations (shields, barriers, armor). In ME 1, no matter what weapon you had, you could tailor it for the situation by changing its materials and the type of round it is shooting. That applies for weapons from the very beginning. Once you get to the late game it's even better. You can't sit and tell me that there is an ME 2 gun better than the end-game weapons that you get from ME 1, which does NOT make sense since the codex leads you to believe that the heat sinks were a universal "upgrade". Possibly for the low-end weapons, but not from the middle game onwards.

Yeah, I do know how hot those heatsinks get. However if there was a substance that dissipated quickly (only useful once) OR if the heat dissipated slowly, then explain how the ME 1 system worked. It's not as if ME 1 technology would suddenly vanish in the two years that Shepard was gone, however that is precisely the case with what ME 2 did to the weapons. A late-game ME 1 single heat sink gun trumps any ME 2 gun at any time with its multiple "heat sinks".

Schneidend wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

I
know what the codex states and I know very well it is paraphrasing what
the Germans discovered when they went to design the STG-44 during WWII,
or why the U.S.A. switched from the M14. More bullets going towards the
enemy means a higher suppression rate and being able to out maneuver, I
get that. However when it comes to Mass Effect, the guns from the first
game kick the guns from the second's ass for the reason that guns don't
use heat sinks, they use ammunition. That's all that there really is to
it.

But if a group of guys with ME2 guns fought a
group of guys with ME1 guns, the ME2 guys would win long before
ammunition ever became an issue...

Not so sure about that. As I stated before, in ME 1 we could swap out parts and components to tailor the enemy that we were fighting. There is no gun in ME 2 (besides a fully charged CAIN) that will outperform ANY mid-to-late game gun from ME 1. None.

Modifié par Dr. Peter Venkman, 09 février 2010 - 05:51 .

[Gar_Logan]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

Gar_Logan wrote...

You call it ammunition for the sole reason it doesn't let you fire if you don't have any more thermal clips.

You can't fire a gun when you run out of...what is it called...ammunition. I didn't have any additional heat sinks in ME 1...why could I fire my weapon repeatedly after it overheated back then?

Because it's fiction. In ME1, when your weapon overheated, why did it cool down? It's probably over 300 degrees! It doesn't cool down THAT fast. Or at all in a mission. If there was a gameplay mechanic to DUNKING your gun in WATER every time it overheated, then I would be on your side.Thermal clips or heat sinks or whatever they are called are actually the most logical answer to that, and should have been done in the beginning. But Bioware was going for a RPG/TPS hybrid where you could have unlimited ammo.

I have to go back into the ME1 codex to check, but did they ever explain how the gun can cool down? Something to do with Mass Effect fields or something probably. Mass Effect fields go with everything.

[Schneidend]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

Not so sure about that. As I stated before, in ME 1 we could swap out parts and components to tailor the enemy that we were fighting. There is no gun in ME 2 (besides a fully charged CAIN) that will outperform ANY mid-to-late game gun from ME 1. None.

The Demotivator and I are inclined to disagree. *Polishes his Revenant lovingly.*

[RiouHotaru]

1) The Codex is being general. For standard military operations NOT within the Terminus Systems, for a group of soldiers, ROF = win. The Codex isn't being specific to Shepard's situation.



2) Yes, I will say the ME2 weapons are better than the ME1 weapons. Have you actually used the Widow? Or the Claymore? Or the Revenant? Or the Incisior? These weapons are all tremendously potent (the Widow is pretty much OP and I'm an Infiltrator!) compared to their ME1 counterparts which came in only a few varieties, of which only an even smaller handful were useful.



3) How did the ME1 guns work? On the system you guys want back so badly. Passive cooling. They manually released all the heat built up within the gun, likely through vents or exhaust ports or something. However, cooling down the gun's mechanisms from a state of overheating takes significantly more time than just slamming home a thermal clip.

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

Gar_Logan wrote...

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...

Gar_Logan wrote...

You call it ammunition for the sole reason it doesn't let you fire if you don't have any more thermal clips.

You can't fire a gun when you run out of...what is it called...ammunition. I didn't have any additional heat sinks in ME 1...why could I fire my weapon repeatedly after it overheated back then?

Because it's fiction. In ME1, when your weapon overheated, why did it cool down? It's probably over 300 degrees! It doesn't cool down THAT fast. Or at all in a mission. If there was a gameplay mechanic to DUNKING your gun in WATER every time it overheated, then I would be on your side.Thermal clips or heat sinks or whatever they are called are actually the most logical answer to that, and should have been done in the beginning. But Bioware was going for a RPG/TPS hybrid where you could have unlimited ammo.

I have to go back into the ME1 codex to check, but did they ever explain how the gun can cool down? Something to do with Mass Effect fields or something probably. Mass Effect fields go with everything.

It's a major discrepancy between ME and ME 2, which is what I have been trying to point out. You can't say "you can't reuse heatsinks in ME 2" when you only had ONE heatsink in ME 1 that did just fine. Did heatsink technology jump backwards in two years? And as far as walking around with a tub of water either for two reasons: the combination of excessive heat and suddenly cold temperatures would ruin the metallurgy of the weapon, and a water-cooled barrel would make for a very heavy weapon, most likely stationary.

RiouHotaru wrote...

1) The Codex is being general. For
standard military operations NOT within the Terminus Systems, for a
group of soldiers, ROF = win. The Codex isn't being specific to
Shepard's situation.

2) Yes, I will say the ME2 weapons are
better than the ME1 weapons. Have you actually used the Widow? Or the
Claymore? Or the Revenant? Or the Incisior? These weapons are all
tremendously potent (the Widow is pretty much OP and I'm an
Infiltrator!) compared to their ME1 counterparts which came in only a
few varieties, of which only an even smaller handful were useful.

3)
How did the ME1 guns work? On the system you guys want back so badly.
Passive cooling. They manually released all the heat built up within
the gun, likely through vents or exhaust ports or something. However,
cooling down the gun's mechanisms from a state of overheating takes
significantly more time than just slamming home a thermal clip.

1) ROF =/= win, since ME 2 changed how weapons do damage! If anything, the ME 2 system has made soldiers suck since they only have one gun!

2) The widow is what I exclusively used after getting it on the collector ship, however you can't use it in all situations like you could with a customised weapon in ME 1. The Widow would be more powerful with an ME 1 system.

3). It does take significantly more time, however as has already been noted, you're never going to get overheated in ME 1 once you make it past the middle of the game where the level XII weapons start showing up with their three open slots. Did the cooling agents magically disappear in the ME universe? This still does not shed any light on why heat sinks in ME 1 could overheat and be re-used and they cannot in ME-2, even with the passive cooling you mentioned. It makes no sense to completely ditch passive cooling to use one-trick pony heat sinks. Why not both (which is what I expected ME 2 to be like)?

Modifié par Dr. Peter Venkman, 09 février 2010 - 06:09 .

[Dusk1976]

blank1 wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

blank1 wrote...

I like how you say "it's physics, dawg" but don't actually know what you're talking about, fcktard. It's impossible to have a frictionless material, period. The implementation is fine -- it unbreaks a system that was retarded and broken. Go play your gay turned based combat RPG where you have to remember to eat and and drink every 5 hours if you think it's so broken -- ME2's gameplay beats the sht out of ME1's.

It's also impossible to travel faster than light, but it's how you get around. And, the item description even says that it's not 100% frictionless, just incredibly close to it and there's still heat buildup. I've also mentioned numerous times that Mass Effect 1 had plenty of broken combat issues, this was just a shoddy implementation that didn't make any sense. Keep trying champ, someday you'll go a whole day without drooling all over yourself.

You're trying way to hard bro. If you have the mass effect field tech of the ME universe, light travel would be hard at all. Hop into a mass effect field, have a powerful enough source of thrust, and you're at lightspeed. While impossible in the realm of real physics because element zero doesn't actually exist, if it did, and had the exact same effect as it does in ME, then yeah sure, FTL would make perfect sense.

The item description does say it's not 100% frictionless, but there isn't even such a thing as being 90% frictionless. It does not exist, not even in the ME universe. This heatsink system isn't so "shoddy" as you call it -- it rewards having to aim. Apparently, you lake the hand-eye coordination to not miss? Go play WoW or something, pal.

Setting aside the "Overheat vs. Bullets" debate for a moment, do YOU understand physics? Near-frictionless surfaces are constantly in development, and frictionless chambers already exist. There's this REALLY massive one in Switzerland, called the Large Hadron Collider. If there was friction in the vaccum chamber, the heat generated by an attempt to accellerate a particle to near light speed would melt the Eurasian continent. To channel Mordin: "Studied engineering, Heat, friction, lubrication. Actual name of class at USC."

Also, real physicists allow for the notion that they might be wrong. The Theory of Gravity is being re-examined because, given a relative object's mass, gravity is an extremely weak force. There is no logical reason why the Moon stays in orbit - to say nothing of the fact that it is tidally locked to the Earth - given the difference in mass, nor has an explaination been collectively agreed upon to the origin of the Moon (not part of the Earth, but Earth's mass isn't great enough to snatch a comet of that size, either). Physicists are now examining if gravity is a binding force that exists in an 11th dimension (seriously; Google "11 dimension M theory). For all our "knowledge," the truth is we don't know a damn thing about how multidimensional physics really works... not even within three dimensions. let alone more than that.

Now, regarding Overheat vs Bullets: I like sniping, in both ME 1/2 and Gears 1/2. I make every shot count, no matter what gun I'm using - although the accuracy of the SMG in ME2 sucks, even at medium range. That being said, I have yet to encounter a time in Gears where I run out of ammo on ANY difficulty. I ran out of ammo before the shed on Horizon because I only found four clips between the drop zone and the auto-refill when you finish talking to the mechanic. Four. I haven't had ammo issues like this since Resident Evil on the PS1.

And why is it that, if heat sinks/clips are the new standard, I can't pick up the extra clips lying around to use at a later time? That would make sense for "universal heat sink tech." Instead of a straight bullet count, you should have a cache of clips that you can inject into any non-heavy weapon. That way, if you have a preferred weapon, you can stick with that. I'd love to try and beat the entire game with an Infiltrator using only a heavy pistol. Due to the poorly implemented "thermal clip" system, I don't have that option.

Putting away the soapbox now. Resuming running out of ammo.

[RiouHotaru]

Running out of ammo? What class are you playing? I almost never have problems with ammo except on the Sniper Rifle, which I often overuse because the slow-mo shots are simply wicked. Also, the point of ME2 was to eliminate the "preferred" weapon. Again, in ME1, Pistols outdamaged EVERY other weapon in the game, and the only other weapon worth using was the Sniper Rifle for range.



As for completing the game with just the heavy pistol, given that the heavy pistol isn't made to take out shields, why would you purposefully nerf yourself?

[Gar_Logan]

...It would be worse to change it back now. That'd be an even WORSE retcon than the one they've already done. I think the system works, but if the only reason you don't like it is because it's a change in lore...it isn't. Stuff evolves. How things are built evolves. Maybe weapons manufacturers found that small, individual (around 2 inch) heatsinks being ejected is faster than waiting for one to cool down.



Consider Person A. He had thermal clips. He's battling person B. Who has your one heatsink style weapon. Person B's weapon overheats, he's waiting for it to cool down. Person A ejects his heatsink and has a full round of ammunition ready. Person A rushes person B while he's screwed over.



At least I can see why weapons manufacturers would prefer speed over quantity. Being able to take someone down fast is a lot more efficient than long drawn out battles while people wait for their damn gun to cool down. Shotgun users are particularly screwed with this system unless they have top of the line stuff. Which not many can afford.

[RiouHotaru]

Dr. Peter Venkman wrote...
1) ROF =/= win, since ME 2 changed how weapons do damage! If anything, the ME 2 system has made soldiers suck since they only have one gun!

2) The widow is what I exclusively used after getting it on the collector ship, however you can't use it in all situations like you could with a customised weapon in ME 1. The Widow would be more powerful with an ME 1 system.

3). It does take significantly more time, however as has already been noted, you're never going to get overheated in ME 1 once you make it past the middle of the game where the level XII weapons start showing up with their three open slots. Did the cooling agents magically disappear in the ME universe? This still does not shed any light on why heat sinks in ME 1 could overheat and be re-used and they cannot in ME-2, even with the passive cooling you mentioned. It makes no sense to completely ditch passive cooling to use one-trick pony heat sinks. Why not both (which is what I expected ME 2 to be like)?

1) Soldiers have access to Pistols, Shotguns, ARs, AND Sniper Rifles...I can't see how Soldiers suck.

2) The Widow would NOT be more powerful, it'd be the equivilant of having an SR with High Explosive Rounds, given the thing was made to shoot at vehicles, not people!

3) You mean Frictionless materials?  Those were likely not available to the army in mass quantitiles.  Also, heatsinks/thermal clips didn't exist in ME1.  The entire system was based on passive cooling, no clip or heat sinks were present whatsoever. 

Modifié par RiouHotaru, 09 février 2010 - 06:16 .

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

Gar_Logan wrote...
but if the only reason you don't like it is because it's a change in lore...it isn't. Stuff evolves. How things are built evolves. Maybe weapons manufacturers found that small, individual (around 2 inch) heatsinks being ejected is faster than waiting for one to cool down.

It didn't evolve. It took a step backwards. Both you and Bioware acting as if the Level VII and onwards weapons (as well as components and materials) suddenly disappeared from the Mass Effect universe. This has created a huge discrepancy that doesn't make sense. If the reason for the addition of "heat sink clips" was to "improve weapon design",  and given that heatsinks can only be used once, why do the weapons from ME 1 only feature ONE heatsink and have the ability to cool themselves down? It makes no sense. Remember, we are talking about ALL of the weapons in ME. It's a logical inconsistency.

Consider Person A. He had thermal clips. He's battling person B.
Who has your one heatsink style weapon. Person B's weapon overheats,
he's waiting for it to cool down. Person A ejects his heatsink and has a
full round of ammunition ready. Person A rushes person B while he's
screwed over.

You're forgetting that person B can add components to his weapon to take down Person A quicker, who has to use a specific weapon (like an SMG at range, rofl) to take down barriers, shields, and armor. There's a lot more to it than heat sinks, but in general the "heat sinks" seem to be an improvement only for people who could not afford the good stuff.

At least I can see why weapons manufacturers would
prefer speed over quantity. Being able to take someone down fast is a
lot more efficient than long drawn out battles while people wait for
their damn gun to cool down. Shotgun users are particularly screwed with
this system unless they have top of the line stuff. Which not many can
afford.

I can see why too, when it comes to low end weapons. It's the same way in the firearm industry; different guns for different price ranges and customers. But why the hell would I want to use an ME 2-style gun if I have the infinite funding that Cerberus provides that could allot the money needed to buy a kickass IX pistol?