339 réponses à ce sujet

[blank1]

Sassymcgee wrote...

blank1 wrote...

Sassymcgee wrote...

Because advances in technology should be advances, not a weird excuse to go from essentially infinite ammo to shoving ammo into your game. Don't call them heatsinks. It's ammo.

Read your codex on heatsinks and you'll see that thermal magazines are an upgrade the Alliance picked up fighting the Geth heritics. From a tactical perspective, having an immediate way to cooldown your weapon and keep up sustained fire is superior. I think people like you are just mad you can't just stick two frictionless materials in your assault rifle and just hold down the trigger forever now -- because that makes SO much sense.

I read the codex as soon as I saw the new system.

It's their excuse. If it was implemented as I said I'd understand why. It would still allow ME to have a unique system that demonstrates that it's actually in the future and that something major has changed. If you notice I said 'almost infinite' demonstrating my understanding of the flaw of the first one and its implementation. Tell me which would you rather have. Ammo, because this is what the game acts as. Or infinite ammo, and a system that actually prohibits holding down your mouse compared to HOLD DOWN "R" HOLD DOWN "R" HOLD DOWN "R" SWITCH WEAPONS HOLD DOWN....
Trust me. The way you describe my assumed reasoning for preferring the older system doesn't hold up. I thought the other required much more tactical thought than this current change? Why? Because as it stands ME was the only game with the system, and then ME2 implemented an ammo system and called it heatsink and said it was an advancement in technnology. 

Once again, it WOULD be if several things did not happen.

"You run out of heatsink, you can no longer fire one shot"
"Your gun never cools down, so the heat sinks act as bullets and clips"

It's ammo. It's not tactical, it's god damn in every other game. Even if it was some tactical and strategic system, it's in every other game and unoriginal and tried to act as such with a new name. Come on. I can understand preferring an ammo system, thats not my position. I'm simply stating I liked the old because I felt IT required more thinking and it was actually original and made sense in the universe and its point in time.

In your quest for a unique shooter experience, I think you're blinding yourself to what "tacitcal" really means. Tactical is definately not having an AR that you can shoot for 10 minutes straight, or a sniper that never runs out of ammo, so you can snipe a whole base of Geth without being in any trouble remotely. Just because it's an ammo system that many, many other games have used doesn't mean it isn't tactical. In fact, every "tactical" shooter uses ammuntion -- along with every twitch shooter.

And yes, I understand that the ME1 system was superior from our own perspective. But we need to remember that the game canon is always under a microscope -- things in game doesn't necessarily reflect the "actual" of the Mass Effect universe. From a canon perspective, perhaps the heatsinks work 10x better becase, in canon, maybe it took a weapon 2 minutes to cool down after expending a certain amount of shots.

[ABCoLD]

The Governator wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

No its pretty easy to run out of 'ammo.' Try using a shotgun.

I dislike it immensely. Especially since I'm the only being in the galaxy operating with heat sink limitations. Neither my squadmates or enemies have to deal with it.

LOL, that's it precisely.  They don't run out of heat sinks, but *I* certainly do!  I hate having to expose myself to enemy fire to look for heat sinks.  

ME1 had the PERFECT science explanation for unlimited ammunition and had a counterbalance to it.  But noooooo, someone somehwere just HAD to complain and now we have frigging heat sinks.

this

[KalosCast]

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.

[blank1]

ABCoLD 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.

First off, the weapons are mass accelerators, so I'd like to know where you think friction actually enters this equation.  Beyond that, don't be such a potty mouth.

Your understanding of physics is poor if you think that mass accelerators don't produce it. In order for a projectile to be accurate, it's has to fit its barrel snugly so that the rifling can give it its proper twist as it travels through it -- this means there is going to be metal on metal contact, while these weapons fire projectiles at massive speeds. The mass effect fields in the weaposn don't reduce its mass to zero -- otherwise, we'd have projectiles coming out of rifles with the kinetic power of tactical nuclear weapons.  That means, there is going to be friction, and thus heat. Don't even get me started on how much heat would be produced by the power system necessary to make this whole thing work -- the electric bleed, since there isn't such thing as a room temperature superconductor in the ME universe that we know of, of powering a weapon would create massive heat in itself.

Modifié par blank1, 04 février 2010 - 06:50 .

[ABCoLD]

blank1 wrote...

In your quest for a unique shooter experience, I think you're blinding yourself to what "tacitcal" really means. Tactical is definately not having an AR that you can shoot for 10 minutes straight, or a sniper that never runs out of ammo, so you can snipe a whole base of Geth without being in any trouble remotely. Just because it's an ammo system that many, many other games have used doesn't mean it isn't tactical. In fact, every "tactical" shooter uses ammuntion -- along with every twitch shooter.

And yes, I understand that the ME1 system was superior from our own perspective. But we need to remember that the game canon is always under a microscope -- things in game doesn't necessarily reflect the "actual" of the Mass Effect universe. From a canon perspective, perhaps the heatsinks work 10x better becase, in canon, maybe it took a weapon 2 minutes to cool down after expending a certain amount of shots.

I believe the complaint was that having ammo doesn't make the game tactical.  It makes the game like every other shooter out there. 

Ya know, I'm reading the Codex entry in ME2 right now that explains clips... and it kinda makes sense, for crappy guns.  With guns that overheated easily it's much faster if you have a supply of clips to switch out clips.  But with more expensive weapons that cool more easily the overheat system is a more elegant solution to the problem, as measured fire (without FMX x 2) would mean that the weapon would have the potential to overheat, but would still perform better than a clipped gun.

So, why not the best of both worlds and have some DLC that actually produces weapons with the old Heat sink system?

[blank1]

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.

[casedawgz]

The lore excuse is obviously Bioware trying to cover their bases, but I can't say I blame them. The new system feels much better as far as gameplay is concerned, and that matters more than a codex entry.

[Sassymcgee]

blank1 wrote...

Sassymcgee wrote...

blank1 wrote...

Sassymcgee wrote...

Because advances in technology should be advances, not a weird excuse to go from essentially infinite ammo to shoving ammo into your game. Don't call them heatsinks. It's ammo.

Read your codex on heatsinks and you'll see that thermal magazines are an upgrade the Alliance picked up fighting the Geth heritics. From a tactical perspective, having an immediate way to cooldown your weapon and keep up sustained fire is superior. I think people like you are just mad you can't just stick two frictionless materials in your assault rifle and just hold down the trigger forever now -- because that makes SO much sense.

I read the codex as soon as I saw the new system.

It's their excuse. If it was implemented as I said I'd understand why. It would still allow ME to have a unique system that demonstrates that it's actually in the future and that something major has changed. If you notice I said 'almost infinite' demonstrating my understanding of the flaw of the first one and its implementation. Tell me which would you rather have. Ammo, because this is what the game acts as. Or infinite ammo, and a system that actually prohibits holding down your mouse compared to HOLD DOWN "R" HOLD DOWN "R" HOLD DOWN "R" SWITCH WEAPONS HOLD DOWN....
Trust me. The way you describe my assumed reasoning for preferring the older system doesn't hold up. I thought the other required much more tactical thought than this current change? Why? Because as it stands ME was the only game with the system, and then ME2 implemented an ammo system and called it heatsink and said it was an advancement in technnology. 

Once again, it WOULD be if several things did not happen.

"You run out of heatsink, you can no longer fire one shot"
"Your gun never cools down, so the heat sinks act as bullets and clips"

It's ammo. It's not tactical, it's god damn in every other game. Even if it was some tactical and strategic system, it's in every other game and unoriginal and tried to act as such with a new name. Come on. I can understand preferring an ammo system, thats not my position. I'm simply stating I liked the old because I felt IT required more thinking and it was actually original and made sense in the universe and its point in time.

In your quest for a unique shooter experience, I think you're blinding yourself to what "tacitcal" really means. Tactical is definately not having an AR that you can shoot for 10 minutes straight, or a sniper that never runs out of ammo, so you can snipe a whole base of Geth without being in any trouble remotely. Just because it's an ammo system that many, many other games have used doesn't mean it isn't tactical. In fact, every "tactical" shooter uses ammuntion -- along with every twitch shooter.

And yes, I understand that the ME1 system was superior from our own perspective. But we need to remember that the game canon is always under a microscope -- things in game doesn't necessarily reflect the "actual" of the Mass Effect universe. From a canon perspective, perhaps the heatsinks work 10x better becase, in canon, maybe it took a weapon 2 minutes to cool down after expending a certain amount of shots.

Tactical is having to burst and be precise and having penalties if you rambo it. 

Tactical is having to place your rounds in specific locations because if you dont you will have to find ammo.

Both have their shades of strategy and maneuvers and lines of thought that play into what tactical means. I feel the old system was more tactical, because it didnt allow you to hold down your mouse button. You overheated, you switched weapons or waited. You decide which is better, and you decide what weapon if switching is more advantageous. I mentioned 'unique' not because I'm in some quest to find unique systems and damn the consequences, but because it was another advantage of the system, being able to have an experience that you generally dont have elsewhere.

I feel the old system was superior, and was more fitting to what the ME universe was. You add to that the 'we advanced technology so now you have an ammo system' and it only amplifies what my thoughts already would be.

I already stated how I believe BW could have the best of both worlds, and it seems to be the general consensus of most as implied with what their problems with the new system is.

Modifié par Sassymcgee, 04 février 2010 - 06:57 .

[AtreiyaN7]

I think people are obsessed with the lore issue. I loved ME1 and the lore, but I believe that the clips have improved combat and made it more challenging purely from the standpoint of the game mechanics. Therefore, I wouldn't have cared if they said that thermal clips were developed by the bloody Reapers themselves or that they were actually a bit of long-lost Prothean technology - whatever. It doesn't matter how they explain it as far as I'm concerned. I care a little more about being challenged.

[Mox Ruuga]

What kind of soldier goes to battle with 10 shots for his sniper rifle. What kind of military expects their soldiers to stars looting fallen enemies for ammo after 10 shots?

It's not plausible or realistic in the least.

I'm fairly sure Bioware won't be going back to the full ME1 system, but they should add the passive cooldown back. The heat clips can act as an emergency feature for situations where you need to fire non stop for short times. Boss battles, enemy human wave assaults, krogan encounters, etc.

Hell, they can add a slight chance for the weapon to break everytime it locks down from overheating. Your AR breaks, too bad. But you've still got the pistol and the shotgun.

[uberman409]

I would be fine with it were it not for the fact that the enemies have infinite ammo, while you have to go tromping around for fuel cells or clips. By then, you're extremely vulnerable because you probably ran out of ammo for a reason - You're best with a certain gun, and there were too many targets. Your team mates aren't exactly the best for covering, so you're stuck.

[Sassymcgee]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I think people are obsessed with the lore issue. I loved ME1 and the lore, but I believe that the clips have improved combat and made it more challenging purely from the standpoint of the game mechanics. Therefore, I wouldn't have cared if they said that thermal clips were developed by the bloody Reapers themselves or that they were actually a bit of long-lost Prothean technology - whatever. It doesn't matter how they explain it as far as I'm concerned. I care a little more about being challenged.

If you care about being challenged then you shouldn't be playing BW games.

[blank1]

ABCoLD wrote...

blank1 wrote...

In your quest for a unique shooter experience, I think you're blinding yourself to what "tacitcal" really means. Tactical is definately not having an AR that you can shoot for 10 minutes straight, or a sniper that never runs out of ammo, so you can snipe a whole base of Geth without being in any trouble remotely. Just because it's an ammo system that many, many other games have used doesn't mean it isn't tactical. In fact, every "tactical" shooter uses ammuntion -- along with every twitch shooter.

And yes, I understand that the ME1 system was superior from our own perspective. But we need to remember that the game canon is always under a microscope -- things in game doesn't necessarily reflect the "actual" of the Mass Effect universe. From a canon perspective, perhaps the heatsinks work 10x better becase, in canon, maybe it took a weapon 2 minutes to cool down after expending a certain amount of shots.

I believe the complaint was that having ammo doesn't make the game tactical.  It makes the game like every other shooter out there. 

Ya know, I'm reading the Codex entry in ME2 right now that explains clips... and it kinda makes sense, for crappy guns.  With guns that overheated easily it's much faster if you have a supply of clips to switch out clips.  But with more expensive weapons that cool more easily the overheat system is a more elegant solution to the problem, as measured fire (without FMX x 2) would mean that the weapon would have the potential to overheat, but would still perform better than a clipped gun.

So, why not the best of both worlds and have some DLC that actually produces weapons with the old Heat sink system?

Ammo doesn't make the game tactical in and of itself, but it certainly helps. You can play any shooter tactical if you want it to be, even a twitch shooter, or a shooter with inifite ammo such as ME1. The problem is that, if a player is looking to maximize his own effectiveness, which seems to be a natural reflex, he'll play in the way that he dies the least and kills the most -- maximizing "resources" I suppose. Therefore, if you can achieve something in a game that seems cheap and not fun, but works, a lot of people will do it -- IE, frictionless materials x 2 and shoot AR forever. Having an ammo system in a 3rd person shooter, such as Bioware has down, makes it tactical whether you like it your not -- you have finite resources and have to maximize what you have until you can resupply (Which isn't hard in ME2 at all). You have to think about how to best maximize those resources... using, you know, tactics.

[KalosCast]

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.

Lmao. Try reading my post next time. I've pointed out on these forums time and time again that ME is and has been predominantly a shooter, I like shooters. However, changing the gun system and then coming up with an explanation that doesn't even approach making sense is a shotty implementation of the feature. One day you'll learn how to format an argument, champ.

[blank1]

KalosCast wrote...

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.

Lmao. Try reading my post next time. I've pointed out on these forums time and time again that ME is and has been predominantly a shooter, I like shooters. However, changing the gun system and then coming up with an explanation that doesn't even approach making sense is a shotty implementation of the feature. One day you'll learn how to format an argument, champ.

I enjoy how you are trying so hard to make my argument look
fallacious, but you don't actually have the mental capacity to show
why, and you therefore resort to being dismissive. "Format an argument." LOL, shut up, don't act like you're smart, you're not.

If you like shooters, you must be terrible at them if an ammo system bothers you so much. I ran through ME2 three times on three different classes and had no issues with ammo.

[AtreiyaN7]

Sassymcgee wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

I think people are obsessed with the lore issue. I loved ME1 and the lore, but I believe that the clips have improved combat and made it more challenging purely from the standpoint of the game mechanics. Therefore, I wouldn't have cared if they said that thermal clips were developed by the bloody Reapers themselves or that they were actually a bit of long-lost Prothean technology - whatever. It doesn't matter how they explain it as far as I'm concerned. I care a little more about being challenged.

If you care about being challenged then you shouldn't be playing BW games.

Oh, would it have been better if I'd specified "more challenged than in ME1 where I could spam my pistol"? I've been playing BioWare games since Baldur's Gate - thanks. While I'm tempted to be sarcastic, I think I'll take the high road here. Too many people on these forums act like complete tools as it is - woops - guess maybe a hint of snark is slipping out. If Bioware is going to include combat a la ME1, then this is a natural progression. If you want to include shooter-style combat as one facet of the game, then it should be done as well as the rest of the game.

[KalosCast]

blank1 wrote...

I enjoy how you are trying so hard to make my argument look
fallacious, but you don't actually have the mental capacity to show
why, and you therefore resort to being dismissive. "Format an argument." LOL, shut up, don't act like you're smart, you're not.

If you like shooters, you must be terrible at them if an ammo system bothers you so much. I ran through ME2 three times on three different classes and had no issues with ammo.

I enjoy how you ignore exactly what my argument is, make up something else, and then try to attack it.

Once again, the implementation doesnt' make any sense. We're told it's heatsinks, but they don't behave like heatsinks, they behave like bullets. We're told they're universal, but each gun has its own exclusive ammo pool. I have no problem with it using ammo, I even said that in one of my posts (try reading the thread next time, champ). I have a problem with the explanation of the gunplay change making absolutely no sense. I even mentioned I would have been perfectly okay with just a simple retcon of "that idea was stupid, guns use ammo now".

Did I spell it out simple enough for you this time?

[Felix Golden]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

KalosCast wrote...

Also: If these heat-sinks are universal, why is my heavy pistol empty and my SMG still has 500 rounds?

This was my other problem with it. Heat sinks are 'universal' yet all my weapons don't draw from the same pool of available sinks.

Also, why couldn't I reuse sinks when they cooled down? Your weapon should never be rendered unable to fire just because you don't have a new sink. If you didn't fire your gun for a bit, the sink should have cooled down.

If they wanted an ammo system they should have just made it an ammo system. The heat sink idea was very poorly implemented.

This

Heat sinks were arguably the dumbest idea in ME2. having to put a new brick of ammo, i could respect

But there is NO reason why i couldnt just drop an overheated heat sink back into the pouch and wait for it to cool down while i use up the other ones i have.

And i cant think of a single reason why an armed forces would go from a system where a soldier never runs out of ammo and only has to carry their weapon, would suddenly (and universaly) switch to a system which requires their soldiers to carry different heat sinks for every type of weapon they carry (the universality of heat sinks is BS too)

Screw this, give me access to a bunker with all the "out dated" weapons from two years ago and il show the idiots who switched this around how to rock

[RiouHotaru]

The Governator wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...

No its pretty easy to run out of 'ammo.' Try using a shotgun.

I dislike it immensely. Especially since I'm the only being in the galaxy operating with heat sink limitations. Neither my squadmates or enemies have to deal with it.

LOL, that's it precisely.  They don't run out of heat sinks, but *I* certainly do!  I hate having to expose myself to enemy fire to look for heat sinks.  

ME1 had the PERFECT science explanation for unlimited ammunition and had a counterbalance to it.  But noooooo, someone somehwere just HAD to complain and now we have frigging heat sinks.

Lol, or maybe people didn't like having enemies popping Immunity and taking 10 minutes or more to kill 2 or 3 Krogan with instant shield recovery?

ME1's system ONLY worked because enemies were so ridiculously durable as to be tougher than any of the bosses.

You can't use the ME1 system for ME2.  It just.  Doesn't.  Work.

[blank1]

KalosCast wrote...

blank1 wrote...

I enjoy how you are trying so hard to make my argument look
fallacious, but you don't actually have the mental capacity to show
why, and you therefore resort to being dismissive. "Format an argument." LOL, shut up, don't act like you're smart, you're not.

If you like shooters, you must be terrible at them if an ammo system bothers you so much. I ran through ME2 three times on three different classes and had no issues with ammo.

I enjoy how you ignore exactly what my argument is, make up something else, and then try to attack it.

Once again, the implementation doesnt' make any sense. We're told it's heatsinks, but they don't behave like heatsinks, they behave like bullets. We're told they're universal, but each gun has its own exclusive ammo pool. I have no problem with it using ammo, I even said that in one of my posts (try reading the thread next time, champ). I have a problem with the explanation of the gunplay change making absolutely no sense. I even mentioned I would have been perfectly okay with just a simple retcon of "that idea was stupid, guns use ammo now".

Did I spell it out simple enough for you this time?

The fact that you didn't see my refutation to that is pretty much damning evidence of your stupidity. I'll refute this new argument that you've fabricated as well.

There isn't an issue with heatsinks in that they "behave" like bullets. They only do so from you're own perspective. I think it'd be fairly standard protical to for a heatsink to store a certain amount of shots per canister -- you can shave off a grain from your block of metal to fire, and you have enough room in your heat sink to fire that 50 times before you need to switch the canister. How hard is that to comprehend?

The reason why guns have restricted ammo pools, despite the universal magazines, is because the game would be retardedly easy if you had a Widow Anti-Material rifle with 100 shots. I think you're just bad at games, TBH. The logic is simple, even for you. If you want to shoot your AR for 10 minutes straight, ME1 is still around brah.

Modifié par blank1, 04 février 2010 - 07:13 .

[Giantevilhead]

I'm disappointed that instead of trying to fix/improve the old system, they just decided to copy Gears of War.

[blank1]

Goodness.



The heatsink system works just fine. The game is fun as hell. The combat is better than ME1.



ME3 is probably going to be the same way, 95% sure of it. Live with it.

[KalosCast]

blank1 wrote...

The fact that you didn't see my refutation to that is pretty much damning evidence of your stupidity. I'll refute this new argument that you've fabricated as well.

There isn't an issue with heatsinks in that they "behave" like bullets. They only do so from you're own perspective. I think it'd be fairly standard protical to for a heatsink to store a certain amount of shots per canister -- you can shave off a grain from your block of metal to fire, and you have enough room in your heat sink to fire that 50 times before you need to switch the canister. How hard is that to comprehend?

The reason why guns have restricted ammo pools, despite the universal magazines, is because the game would be retardedly easy if you had a Widow Anti-Material rifle with 100 shots. I think you're just bad at games, TBH. The logic is simple, even for you. If you want to shoot your AR for 10 minutes straight, ME1 is still around brah.

Okay, lets' look at the Hand Cannon since I guess I have to explain how much of a drooling moron you are. And ONCE AGAIN I have no problem with limited ammo, just the fact that the current system doesn't make any goddamn logical sense...

According to the hand cannon, your heatsink can last 6 shots before overheating

You fire three shots and then eject the heatsink... your pool goes down by three shots even though you lost the entire 6-shot heatsink.

Therefore heatsinks behave like bullets. They don't even behave like clips. Game WITH bullets like Battlefield 2 and SWAT 4 have clips that behave more like heat-clips than Mass Effect and they're using real world tech. (Battlefield 2 you drop the entire magazine on the ground, SWAT 4 you store the old magazine and put a fresh one in, and rotate them)

Therefore, the heatsinks behave like bullets, not like heat-clips or heatsinks that would realistically cool down at some point.

Modifié par KalosCast, 04 février 2010 - 07:18 .

[blank1]

KalosCast wrote...

blank1 wrote...

The fact that you didn't see my refutation to that is pretty much damning evidence of your stupidity. I'll refute this new argument that you've fabricated as well.

There isn't an issue with heatsinks in that they "behave" like bullets. They only do so from you're own perspective. I think it'd be fairly standard protical to for a heatsink to store a certain amount of shots per canister -- you can shave off a grain from your block of metal to fire, and you have enough room in your heat sink to fire that 50 times before you need to switch the canister. How hard is that to comprehend?

The reason why guns have restricted ammo pools, despite the universal magazines, is because the game would be retardedly easy if you had a Widow Anti-Material rifle with 100 shots. I think you're just bad at games, TBH. The logic is simple, even for you. If you want to shoot your AR for 10 minutes straight, ME1 is still around brah.

Okay, lets' look at the Hand Cannon since I guess I have to explain how much of a drooling moron you are. And ONCE AGAIN I have no problem with limited ammo, just the fact that the current system doesn't make any goddamn logical sense...

According to the hand cannon, your heatsink can last 6 shots before overheating

You fire three shots and then eject the heatsink... your pool goes down by three shots even though you lost the entire 6-shot heatsink.

Therefore heatsinks behave like bullets. They don't even behave like clips. Game WITH bullets like Battlefield 2 and SWAT 4 have clips that behave more like heat-clips than Mass Effect and they're using real world tech. (Battlefield 2 you drop the entire magazine on the ground, SWAT 4 you store the old magazine and put a fresh one in, and rotate them)

Therefore, the heatsinks behave like bullets, not like heat-clips or heatsinks that would realistically cool down at some point.

You entirely missed my point.

Remember when I said on page 3 that hyper realism makes for a terrible game? Yeah I uderstand that when you reload with 15 shots left in a magazine, you don't magically get another 15 in your reserve ammo pool. However -- the point of the ammo system is not to be realistic becuase Bioware thinks sht like that is cool -- it's to create a better gameplay experience. I never said that the heatsink system wasn't a carbon copy of an ammo system -- it is. However, it's a way that fits into ME univers canon. Not smoothly, but it still works, and makes for better gameplay without fcking canon in the ass.

You can have your hyper realism. I'll take my fun game, kthx.

Also, I enjoy how you're arguing the straw man fallacy without even being aware of it. lolz

Yo dawg, we heard you like reading comprehension, so we added some comprehension to your reading so you can comprehend while you read. K brah?

Modifié par blank1, 04 février 2010 - 07:23 .

[Corben158]

Because I have access to 3 guns and 2 of them run out very fast, and I have to run around looking for ammo. Me1 had a Perfect handle on this, Me1 was almost a perfect game and they decided it wasn't good enough and scrapped all the things that made it good besides the dialogue and cut scenes