339 réponses à ce sujet

[Railstay]

Malidinus wrote...

I also viewed the thermal clips as a minor annoyance which didn't really add anything positive to the game. The game was absolutely swimming in those clips so there really was no shortage of them but at the same time you constantly had to pick them up. Their overall effect was that they made the game a little less playable. They were an annoyance although a minor one.

Also.. even though I liked the sniper rifle the most I think the weapon variety didn't add pretty much anything to the game.  Yes, the weapons were slightly different but not enough. The game would have been essentially the same game even with a single weapon, no research, no character levels, no thermal clips and so on. Way too much corner cutting on many aspects of the game left most features quite hollow. Exactly what I would have expected of a console game. It's just that I bought the game for PC and would never ever buy a console or console games. :-(

Have you tried using different ability combinations?  Also, you essentially described the first Mass Effect.  All the guns in ME1 did the same thing.  If they did anything different, like a variety of ammo abilities, the difference in the mechanic in ME1 and ME2 is that in ME1 you need to fumble through the inventory to swap ammo.  In ME2, you simply click a button.

Thermal clips and a global skill cooldown means you can design a game that doesn't force you towards making mobs into meatshields that take forever to kill on higher difficulties.  Infinite Ammo, skills on separate cooldowns you can spam one after the other and plentiful grenades meant really really really tough enemies.  Enemies that aren't difficult to take down, but just take extremely long to take down, and that is boring.  Heavy Weapons, GCD and a reload system means a much more tactical game, because you're focused on taking out a variety of enemies as efficiently as possible, not holding down your LMB key whenever you aren't mindlessly jabbing through 1-2-3-4-5.

[Malidinus]

Actually the differences between different versions of a single weapon type in ME1 were greater than they are in ME2 between the weapon types (heavy weapons excluded). Apart from the fact they decided to turn shotgun into a melee weapon.

In ME1 I had some enjoyment every time I got to upgrade my weapons and/or armor. In ME2 it was all just one big yawn. I suppose the best thing about ME2 is the fact it reminded me I should play ME1 through again. This I did and the gameplay just feels like it's at least a decade ahead of ME2. The worst flaw in ME1 reminded me of it's existance pretty fast though. I did remember it was annoying to get the Mako over some mountains but I had completely forgotten just how often you get into those mountain climbing situations

ME1 = PC game. ME2 is console game. I guess that's the main gist of it.

Edit: 'This I did' obviously meant I started playing ME1 again. Didn't go thorugh it yet this time around 

Modifié par Malidinus, 04 février 2010 - 04:12 .

[MasterMegatron]

We liked throwing Frictionless Materials X in our assault rifles, thus having infinite ammo.

[zashark]

I think they should have left it like the first one personally, I like third person shooters so it doesn't bother me too much but like some one mentioned earlier, "it's geared for shooter fans"

[Yantze]

I liked it better. I had to watch my shots until I got the lmg lol. In ME1 I would put 2 scram rail X's with cryo round X's on that spectre assault rifle and it never overheated. That was cheap imo.

[dfjdejulio]

cashogy wrote...

I cant understand the dislike for this new feature. In ME1, if youre rifle overheated it was about a 5 second wait until it could fire again. Now, it takes less than a second to slap in a new heat sink and your back firing at the enemy. And to those that say they run out, youre not paying attention to where they drop. Nearly every enemy drops one when they die, so it is really hard to run out of ammo. I actually find that this feature makes combat flow a lot better, but that might be just me

I'm baffled to discover that anyone likes this better than the old overheat system.

The heat sink system just turns it into another freaking generic ammo system.  It's just like nearly every other shooter out there, and it's annoying, you have a resource you have to manage over the long term.

The overheating system was different, and was more in-line with the genre -- when you watch Star Wars, did you see Han worrying that his blaster would run out and stop working?  No, you didn't.  It might jam, there might be some temporary thing preventing him from using it, but he wasn't doing resource management.

The heat sink system is pure fail.  If I had to pick out the single worst change between ME1 and ME2... actually it'd be that it asks me to swap disks even if I've already installed both disks to hard drive.  (Really.  It's awful.  I've installed both.  BioWare, fix this.  Prevents me from switching between two different careers I'm playing in parallel, because I keep having to constantly swap disks.  But I digress.)

So, okay, it's not the worst change, but it's #2.  This is the worst gameplay change from ME1 to ME2, hands down, no question.  The overheating system was fun.  You could trick out your gun in some ways to absolutely maximize DPS, but if you did so you had to pay attention to how you used it.  Or you could trick out your gun to absolutely minimize overheating, and then you could be a lot more sloppy with how you used it, but your DPS went down.  It was a meaningful choice, and it was consistent with the genre... the overheating system was nearly pure win.

I understand that some people didn't like it.  And this is the big meta-problem with going from ME1 to ME2.  There was stuff in ME1 that needed work.  That stuff should have been reworked and streamlined, not eliminated.  The overheating system is one example, but isn't the only one.  The game has gone too far away from "RPG" and too far towards "action".  It's "Deus Ex 2" all over again -- except that the result is still a spectacular game, just one that makes me sad because of how much better it could have been.  (Six steps forward, five steps back.  Still moved ahead, sure, but why did we have to move backwards at all?)

[Nozybidaj]

I don't dislike it, I just wonder why they went through the trouble to include it. Honestly, it didn't really add anything to the game except a few seconds now and then running around to see if there was an ammo clip somewhere nearby.

[boardnfool86]

I like it better... it makes sense, it makes the gameplay better... and you still don't run out, I don't know how people run out of ammo, I can't even pick up every clip dropped

[mcsquared2]

My sniper rifle never has more than 9 rounds in it. Many times that's not enough because I have to move up (where it's more dangerous) to get heat sinks.

[Kwonnern]

I like it and i have no problems with it at all.

[mcsquared2]

My sniper rifle never has more than 9 rounds in it. Many times that's not enough because I have to move up (where it's more dangerous) to get heat sinks.

[john william]

Nerds hate change and love Tali. There is no reasoning with it.

[dfjdejulio]

Vaemer-Riit wrote...

It really should work where the heatsink would cool over time slowly, but if you needed to continue shooting you could eject the heatsink and continue firing.

This would absolutely be the best compromise.  It would make sense from a technology development standpoint, it would explain why people would adopt the new technology, from a balancing and tactics standpoint it would let stressful fights be limited by the number of heat sinks you had, but it would still permit us to "waste" ammo on shooting wildlife or shooting something in the scenery or something.

It would be an ammunition system where you still used clips, but the clip that's in your gun slowly regenerated over time.  You could eject the clip and your resource count would go down by one, or you could leave the clip in and let it slowly regrow.  In fact there'd be an increased tactical element, in that you'd want to switch weapons before completely expending a clip so that it could cool off.  It would increase the variation in weapons we used.

[Dr. Peter Venkman]

dfjdejulio wrote...

Vaemer-Riit wrote...

It really should work where the heatsink would cool over time slowly, but if you needed to continue shooting you could eject the heatsink and continue firing.

This would absolutely be the best compromise.  It would make sense from a technology development standpoint, it would explain why people would adopt the new technology, from a balancing and tactics standpoint it would let stressful fights be limited by the number of heat sinks you had, but it would still permit us to "waste" ammo on shooting wildlife or shooting something in the scenery or something.

It would be an ammunition system where you still used clips, but the clip that's in your gun slowly regenerated over time.  You could eject the clip and your resource count would go down by one, or you could leave the clip in and let it slowly regrow.  In fact there'd be an increased tactical element, in that you'd want to switch weapons before completely expending a clip so that it could cool off.  It would increase the variation in weapons we used.

I initially thought that the system was going to be something similar to the above: that is to say that ME 2 would have ME 1's overheat system, but in case of an overheat, the heatsink could be popped out. I think that is the best of both worlds while retaining a cool reloading element, but what they did in ME 2 just sucks. Heat sinks = Ammunition, and nothing more.

Modifié par Dr. Peter Venkman, 04 février 2010 - 04:48 .

[IronCladNinja]

I personally like the ammo system, it forces you to move around.

Plus without thermal clips, Garrus wouldn't be able to use them in sexual metaphors 

[AM50]

I liked it personally. It added more difficulty and tactical play into the game. Everyone who was intelligent in ME1 had at least one weapon that could fire without overheating. It puts more pressure on you to use your powers and different guns through the game.

[ChristEater]

Railstay wrote...

Some people are angry about it cause of the lore break.  I do agree that a retcon would be cleaner.

Others for gameplay reasons, which I can't understand at all.  The ability to modify guns so they can fire infinitely without any risk of overheating made the first Mass Effect incredibly boring on higher difficulties.  To compensate you'd have to make enemies that take forever to kill, alternating between Shield Recover and Immunity...

No, you wouldn't. You would just have to make guns put out more eat with each shot and/or reduce the effectiveness of accessories that improve heat disappation. The ME1 system needed work, but I'm annoyed that Bioware did away with it completely instead of spending a bit of time tweaking it.

I don't like this feature primarily because it makes no sense to me. The codex says that this new system is a technological advancement, but it should be clear to everyone who's played through ME1 that this is not the case. Besides, what kind of heat sink doesn't actually disappate heat? If Shepard is wandering around a vacuum, sure, don't let the heat sinks cool down, but he spends a lot of time running around in places that have an atmosphere.

Also, the unlimited ammo/heat system in ME1 was, I thought, one of the coolest features. That's out the window now though. It seems incredibly unlikely that ME3 will switch back to the ME1 heat system, but I'm hoping for a hybrid at least.

Modifié par ChristEater, 04 février 2010 - 05:04 .

[Harley_Dude]

Brand New wrote...

?
Have you played on Insanity ever, say this when you run out of ammo & Harbinger decides to post up on the other side of your cover with a bunch of other collectors scoping in on your head.

Exactly, not to mention running out of med-gel because the AI for your squad stands for Actual Ignorance.

[Yantze]

The Harley Dude wrote...

Brand New wrote...

?
Have you played on Insanity ever, say this when you run out of ammo & Harbinger decides to post up on the other side of your cover with a bunch of other collectors scoping in on your head.

Exactly, not to mention running out of med-gel because the AI for your squad stands for Actual Ignorance.

I havent played it on others but as a Soldier my lmg always had ammo.  There was so many heat sinks on the ground I could not use them all. And your team is useless I ended up soloing half the big fights because my squad got dusted off with a quickness and saving the medi-gel meant I got 100 credits each time I found more lol. And yes this was on insanity.

[Darth_Ultima]

Personally I wish they had a hybrid version of the two systems. All guns except the heavy weapons still had unlimited ammo but have the heat sinks as an instant cool down item. If you did not have any heat sinks in your inventory you had to wait for your gun to cool down. However I really do not mind either system. They both require the same burst fire tactics. The first game you burst fire to keep from over heating. ME2 you burst fire to not waste ammo and for accuracy. In ME1 if you overheated you switched to a different weapon so you could keep shooting and in ME2 if you run out of ammo you still have to switch weapons. So in my operational analysis both systems worked similarly. However from a story line analysis it does not really make much sense to me.

[LemuresXL]

GnusmasTHX wrote...

People either enjoy the mind-numbing chore that was considered 'gun play' in ME1, or are peeved about the apparent lore inconsistency.

Gameplay trumps lore, especially when it's something so trivial.

Damn fine point.

[Harley_Dude]

Darth_Ultima wrote...

Personally I wish they had a hybrid version of the two systems. All guns except the heavy weapons still had unlimited ammo but have the heat sinks as an instant cool down item. If you did not have any heat sinks in your inventory you had to wait for your gun to cool down. However I really do not mind either system. They both require the same burst fire tactics. The first game you burst fire to keep from over heating. ME2 you burst fire to not waste ammo and for accuracy. In ME1 if you overheated you switched to a different weapon so you could keep shooting and in ME2 if you run out of ammo you still have to switch weapons. So in my operational analysis both systems worked similarly. However from a story line analysis it does not really make much sense to me.

That's a good idea. I just started a new game on Insanity and I used the assault rifle with 5 round burst for getting Garrus as party member. It works really well with the ice bullets but I kept running out of ammo so I switched to the machine gun and just trigger burst to maintain accuracy.

[RiouHotaru]

Well, I've seen a few points brought up over and over again, so let's see if we can't address them:
it
Re: Lore Consistency
I'll admit, there are some consistency issues, but ONLY in that the time it took to develop the new technology doesn't explain why there are people who had access to it (like Jacob's father) long before it was done.  To be honest, it's a minor burp.  As the devs weren't going to use the old system at all, they couldn't randomly give enemies guns that worked on the old system.  As for how Shepard knows about it at the start of the game, remember that the new gun technology has been in development likely since the end of ME1.  Since it was designed at first for military use by the Alliance, it makes sense that Commander Shepard has likely either used the new weapons technology or is aware of it.

Re: Heat Sink Universality
There was some issue brought up about 'if the clips are universal why can't I swap clips from one gun to another' going around.  Again, likely this was worked out to prevent the system from becoming more complex.  To micromanage heat-sink distribution among your weapons would destroy the flow of combat.  It'd likely be a lot like in ME1 where you'd pause the game to go into your inventory and switch up mods.  Besides, 'universality' probably more means that thermal clips work in any small arms, which is why you can refill all your guns without switching to them.

Re: Overheating
A few people have asked for a hybrid system, or wonder why you can't just keep shooting and let the gun 'overheat', or why clips don't 'cool down'.  I'll point out a good reason why.  Anyone do Zaeed's loyalty mission?  He ignites some fuel using the heat from a spent heat-sink.  I think we can ALL guess just how hot that spent sink must've been to cause fuel to ignite.  Basically, the heat generated by these new guns is immense, and rightfully so.  With the new thermal clip technology allowing for instant cooling, guns can throw projectiles at greater speeds and deal greater damage (Widow Anti-Material anyone?).  My guess is why you can't keep shooting after you run out?  Because the heat generated by even a few shots might be strong enough you'd either burn yourself or cause damage to the internal mechanisms of the gun.  Obviously there's some kind of safety measure to prevent that.

Re: Hybrid Systems
People have come with what would sound like to be good compromises between ME1 and 2.  However, I should point out the trope of 'The Dev Team Thinks Of Everything'.  Christina Norman during a few of the early interviews states quite clearly that they felt the ME1 combat system was frustrating, with enemies popping Immunity or people being able to Sniper Rifle through entire levels or the Double Frictionless Materials shenanigans.  They DID try hybrid systems of cooling and reloading, and found that their they were still broken, or required too much work to impliment properly.  The reason we have the system we have now is because they looked for alternatives and compromises already.  Not that your ideas aren't good, but likely whatever hybrid we've concoted, they've already tried.

[dfjdejulio]

As the devs weren't going to use the old system at all, they couldn't randomly give enemies guns that worked on the old system.

Actually, they could have put a few guns that used the old system in, and used that to make it perfectly clear why the new system was in such wider use.

All they had to do was put in one old-style gun that the player could use, just one... and give it completely gimped damage output compared to all the new guns.  Make it work like the old ones, but make it completely useless in real combat.  Then we'd have been able to directly experience the "oh, this new tech lets us have considerably more powerful weapons, okay, I can see why we're all using it" argument, instead of having us trust it based on a codex entry or something.

(But in the end, the main reason I hate it is because of how boring it is.  It's just ammo.  It's just like every other shooter.  They could and should have done better.  And the #2 reason I hate it is because how frustrating it is to completely run out of "ammo" for a weapon.  When that happens, you switch to another weapon, and the new ammo you pick up gets "eaten" by that new weapon, instead of being put into a pool you could use for the weapon you actually want ammo for.  Boo!)

[RiouHotaru]

dfjdejulio wrote...

As the devs weren't going to use the old system at all, they couldn't randomly give enemies guns that worked on the old system.

Actually, they could have put a few guns that used the old system in, and used that to make it perfectly clear why the new system was in such wider use.

All they had to do was put in one old-style gun that the player could use, just one... and give it completely gimped damage output compared to all the new guns.  Make it work like the old ones, but make it completely useless in real combat.  Then we'd have been able to directly experience the "oh, this new tech lets us have considerably more powerful weapons, okay, I can see why we're all using it" argument, instead of having us trust it based on a codex entry or something.

(But in the end, the main reason I hate it is because of how boring it is.  It's just ammo.  It's just like every other shooter.  They could and should have done better.  And the #2 reason I hate it is because how frustrating it is to completely run out of "ammo" for a weapon.  When that happens, you switch to another weapon, and the new ammo you pick up gets "eaten" by that new weapon, instead of being put into a pool you could use for the weapon you actually want ammo for.  Boo!)

While your idea on implimentation might work, since we're not developers, we have no idea how difficult it might've been to program or code in such a change, especially just for one mission.  I'm quite confident the developers have a reason for it being the way it is, likely simplicity (what more do you need)

Also, as to your second point, that's not entirely accurate.  I've run out of ammo on my Widow, switched to my heavy pistol, and upon picking up thermal clips got ammo for my sniper rifle, even if I wasn't using it.  So while the new clips you pick up do primarily fill up the weapon you're using, they also go towards any other small arm you have.  And really, as I mentioned above, they did try other systems and methods of implimentation.  I think you are more worried about the realism of it than anything else.