339 réponses à ce sujet

[Fredgtrer]

Stop crying

[Barker673]

If both Shotguns and Sniper Rifles didn't run out of ammo so consistently, it wouldn't be as annoying. Mind you, I am used to it and I've grown accustomed to it, but there is nothing more annoying than running out of ammo and having to run into the line of fire in the middle of a firefight to actually pick up (That annoyed me, the physical act of having to run over a thermal clip) a clip.



If they just had a reload animation that showed ejecting the thermal clip with still infinite ammo, or maybe limited ammo with thermal clips but if they run out still able to shoot but overheats quickly.

[AMmayhem]

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.

Add 2x Frictionless Material X's and you never have to worry about overheating.

[trigger2kill1]

ODST 3 wrote...

Pressing X is too HARRDD! I can't do it. Also, I can't shoot for **** so I waste most of my ammo on the clouds.

Infact my son cannot do that with out nearly dropping the darn controller. So this part is of some interest to me.

But I let him try cause hs gets exceptional grades in school and well with his drivers permit comming up in a few months. Say what you will good grades long hair he has earned the right to play any game that I would at anyrate.

Modifié par trigger2kill1, 05 février 2010 - 05:08 .

[Abrazxas]

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 find combat to be much more fun in ME2 due to it not being the static fights of ME1.  Since I played Infiltrator in ME1, I made my sniper rifle into a one shot kill rocket launcher-esqe kill machine and after awhile, it was boring to kill things with any weapon at all.  I find now, combat is much more satisfying.

[Kileyan]

They should have just sucked it up and called it ammo and thrown the old lore away.



This new thing is silly. I must find heatsinks to cool my weapons, they can NEVER cool down on their own now.



Yet, my engi can flash freeze seven 90 kg targets every 3.4 seconds, yet he can't figure out how to apply that cooling tech to his or his friend guns.



Yeh I hate the new ammo system, still a great game, but I'll still say won't I don't like.

[Andorfiend]

Railstay wrote...

Then nothing has changed.  You can essentially use one gun to conquer the entire game -- very, very shallow gameplay.  If you can snipe your way through the entire game on any difficulty without having to worry about running out of ammo so to speak, then again the only way to increase difficulty would be to make all your enemies very very tough.  Is that what people really want?  A game you can beat using only one gun, spamming only one skill?  There are different types of enemies, different skills and different guns for a reason.  You don't see anyone here whining that Incinerate should affect shields and barriers as well as armor, but suddenly they get into a huffy double standard about guns.

Yes, your sniper rifle can't solve every single problem you face.  It's great at armor penetration, but not so much kinetic barriers.  Your SMG isn't so great on armor, but great against kinetic barriers.  So anyone with common sense would figure out, "Oh, I need to use all the skills at my disposal to succeed in this game."  You use the most efficient skill set and weapon for a situation, and lo and behold, ammo is never really a problem, because you spend it between all your guns relatively evenly.  That's called tactical decisions at work.

If the differences in defenses call for the player to switch weapons depending on foes/distance/siituation, then why the hell do we need an ammo system? If your gripe is that in ME 1 you had a single 'optimal' weapon which made game play boring then the shields/barrier/armour system already fixed your gripe. Why is ammo needed as well? Hell for that matter in ME 1 my favorite weapon was the sniper rifle because it suited my playstyle. But hey! Guess what! Everyone who ran the numbers said the pistol was the best choice for DPS. So I was using a sub optimal choice because it was more fun for me. But in ME 2 I can't because the developer decided that's badwrongfun.

A developer should not ever tell the player he's having badwrongfun.

Now, I can come up with pefectly good lore explanations for the new ammo system (and did frequently enough on the old boards), but as implemented, I do not like it. Why do I only get 18 shots with the gun I like but 500 with the one I don't? It leaves me with no option to use the weapon I prefer. It gives me a false choice, and that sucks. Any 3rd grader can do the math to balance a heavy pistol vs a sub-machine gun with ROF alone, why the hell do I need an ammo system that punches me in the head for trying to aim my shots instead of going for spray-and-pray? Especially when it so damn counterintuitive.

[HAGA NAGA]

i don't have a problem with it. i think it's kinda cool. maybe there is room for improvement, dunno. seems fine to me.

[Kileyan]

grr this forum

Modifié par Kileyan, 05 février 2010 - 05:16 .

[KalosCast]

Andorfiend wrote...

If the differences in defenses call for the player to switch weapons depending on foes/distance/siituation, then why the hell do we need an ammo system? If your gripe is that in ME 1 you had a single 'optimal' weapon which made game play boring then the shields/barrier/armour system already fixed your gripe. Why is ammo needed as well? Hell for that matter in ME 1 my favorite weapon was the sniper rifle because it suited my playstyle. But hey! Guess what! Everyone who ran the numbers said the pistol was the best choice for DPS. So I was using a sub optimal choice because it was more fun for me. But in ME 2 I can't because the developer decided that's badwrongfun.

A developer should not ever tell the player he's having badwrongfun.

Now, I can come up with pefectly good lore explanations for the new ammo system (and did frequently enough on the old boards), but as implemented, I do not like it. Why do I only get 18 shots with the gun I like but 500 with the one I don't? It leaves me with no option to use the weapon I prefer. It gives me a false choice, and that sucks. Any 3rd grader can do the math to balance a heavy pistol vs a sub-machine gun with ROF alone, why the hell do I need an ammo system that punches me in the head for trying to aim my shots instead of going for spray-and-pray? Especially when it so damn counterintuitive.

Add to this that if you're a power-reliant class like the Engineer, to survive during cooldowns, you have to shoot like spray and pray while scoring a headshot every time on Insanity. Which is a pretty interesting challenge but a little bit of a screw-over compared to the Infiltrator who can score one-shot kills at relatively low levels on the higher difficulties, as well as having some power overlap with the Engineer.

Modifié par KalosCast, 05 février 2010 - 05:18 .

[Vaeliorin]

Railstay wrote...
Is that what people really want?  A game you can beat using only one gun, spamming only one skill?

Considering that I beat ME2 using only one gun and spamming only one skill (SMG + Warp) yes, apparently it is what some people want.

While I don't hate the clip system (I only once ever came anywhere near running out), I do hate the universal cooldown.  But that's another topic.

[FredegarKadere]

For those arguing about how the enemies never run out of ammo or heatsinks.. the reason is simple..

They stayed smart and continued to use the plethora of old tech style weapons while Cerberus and the Alliance upgraded to the new 'better' tech.

[Railstay]

Vaeliorin wrote...

Railstay wrote...
Is that what people really want?  A game you can beat using only one gun, spamming only one skill?

Considering that I beat ME2 using only one gun and spamming only one skill (SMG + Warp) yes, apparently it is what some people want.

While I don't hate the clip system (I only once ever came anywhere near running out), I do hate the universal cooldown.  But that's another topic.

What difficulty did you play it on?

Universal cooldown serves the same purpose.  Unlinked cooldowns in the first Mass Effect meant you can spam them all in a sequence, so again the only way to balance enemies at higher difficulties is to turn them into meatshields.  Now deciding what you want to use is a deliberate choice.

[Railstay]

Andorfiend wrote...

Railstay wrote...

Then nothing has changed.  You can essentially use one gun to conquer the entire game -- very, very shallow gameplay.  If you can snipe your way through the entire game on any difficulty without having to worry about running out of ammo so to speak, then again the only way to increase difficulty would be to make all your enemies very very tough.  Is that what people really want?  A game you can beat using only one gun, spamming only one skill?  There are different types of enemies, different skills and different guns for a reason.  You don't see anyone here whining that Incinerate should affect shields and barriers as well as armor, but suddenly they get into a huffy double standard about guns.

Yes, your sniper rifle can't solve every single problem you face.  It's great at armor penetration, but not so much kinetic barriers.  Your SMG isn't so great on armor, but great against kinetic barriers.  So anyone with common sense would figure out, "Oh, I need to use all the skills at my disposal to succeed in this game."  You use the most efficient skill set and weapon for a situation, and lo and behold, ammo is never really a problem, because you spend it between all your guns relatively evenly.  That's called tactical decisions at work.

If the differences in defenses call for the player to switch weapons depending on foes/distance/siituation, then why the hell do we need an ammo system? If your gripe is that in ME 1 you had a single 'optimal' weapon which made game play boring then the shields/barrier/armour system already fixed your gripe. Why is ammo needed as well? Hell for that matter in ME 1 my favorite weapon was the sniper rifle because it suited my playstyle. But hey! Guess what! Everyone who ran the numbers said the pistol was the best choice for DPS. So I was using a sub optimal choice because it was more fun for me. But in ME 2 I can't because the developer decided that's badwrongfun.

Because with infinite ammo, there is no risk with the sniper rifle.  I don't have to be anywhere close to any enemies in the game to take them out, and every time I scope in it slows time.  

A developer should not ever tell the player he's having badwrongfun.

Right.  Lets get rid of health and shields.  Why should I die for playing how I want?  I want to melee everything in the game to death and I'm being penalized!  This is an awful system!

Yes, pushing players to use tactical decisions, all their weapons and a variety of different abilities is a bad thing.

Now, I can come up with pefectly good lore explanations for the new ammo system (and did frequently enough on the old boards), but as implemented, I do not like it. Why do I only get 18 shots with the gun I like but 500 with the one I don't? It leaves me with no option to use the weapon I prefer. It gives me a false choice, and that sucks. Any 3rd grader can do the math to balance a heavy pistol vs a sub-machine gun with ROF alone, why the hell do I need an ammo system that punches me in the head for trying to aim my shots instead of going for spray-and-pray? Especially when it so damn counterintuitive.

Because the powerful guns that can be used at long range are, surprisingly, the guns you're supposed to use with less frequency?  The purpose of the HP is to knock out armor.  So you use it to knock out armor, and lo and behold, you save a lot of ammo.

Profit.

It isn't counter intuitive.  You, and most of the people in this thread talking about the ammo system, kept talking about how you couldn't spam your one favorite gun.  Use a cheat then.  Get infinite ammo in the game, and play through the entire game using the one gun you want to stick by.  Prepare for a snoozefest.

Anyway, you are running away from the argument no one in the infinite ammo camp wants to address:  How would you adjust the difficulty for a combat system with no reload mechanic and no universal cooldown?  The game would become an exercise in patience again, where you held down your LMB on some krogan whose health is not going down at all, because he popped Immunity and other krogan buddies are coming in with the same defensive mechanics.  All because there is no cap on ammo, and you are able to fire out all your skills in succession.

Modifié par Railstay, 05 février 2010 - 01:37 .

[Railstay]

TudorWolf wrote...

Soldier on Insanity does not do well for limited ammo.

You get cut down in seconds, yet in a big firefight I often find the need to run into the open to find a heatsink out of necessity. Reason being that Soldiers can't do diddlysquat without ammo, short of an offensive bonus power or melee attacks, the latter of which is literal suicide and the former a limitation for some.

I don't mind the system, but when you start getting screwed over on the higher difficulties because enemies take so much to put down it starts to chafe.

Sounds like you need to start an Insanity character at Level 1 or 5.

The enemies in the game scale with level, so it's actually a lot harder to use a NG+ character on Insanity than a fresh one.  At Level 1 and 5 the enemies are weaker, but at Level 28+ the enemies are harder and you start with no upgrades.

[Adjite]

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 like the new feature. Its much more fun to me. ( I play Infiltrator ). " Let those bullets count"  

[Brockxz]

Adjite wrote...

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 like the new feature. Its much more fun to me. ( I play Infiltrator ). " Let those bullets count"  

I like it too and also playing as Infiltrator. If i had unlimited ammo there would not be any challenge to take down enemies with my sniper rifle. So i make that every bullet counts and try to go for headshots or some other methods to stop enemies rushing to me. That's why you choose your squad carefully and use their and your's abilities to conserve heatsinks.

[Nimander]

I don't mind it. I do think that certain weapons -- shotguns and sniper rifles, especially -- are a little low on the ammo count, though. I tried a Vanguard, and I'm just clinging to the idea of upgrading my shotgun to double my shots capacity, because then I might not run out so often. If they multiplied Shotguns and Snipers by x2 and then turned the extra shotgun ammo to x1.5 like SMG, it'd be okay in general though.

[Contempt6289]

Gameplay wise, I had no issues. Lore wise it just doesn't make any sense.

[fchopin]

You can talk from here to eternity and it will still not change the fact that everything in the game has infinite ammo apart from the player.



And if you call it heat sink I see it as ammo, still boring for me and I don’t play games to be bored I play to enjoy.

[andysdead]

ReubenLiew wrote...

It's the same feature for most other games, true.
I just didn't like it cause I liked having unlimited ammo on my sniper rifle >.>

i liked my 1-shot-kill sniper rifle that would overheat every time i shot it....

[pozipoziamparo]

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

Cos now it feels like EVERY OTHER DAMNED FPS in the market. You're just reloading, no matter how you look at it. ME1 system wasn't that great, but at least it was different.

[NarayanNL]

I dislike the entire system.

I liked playing around with upgrades in the first game customizing a gun the way you liked it.

Giving it the ability to never overheat or upgrading the damage. Changing munition type depending on enemies. Some of it is still in there but not as diverse as in the first game.

You can say but now the gunplay is much better well yes it is but it's still lacking

I can't understand this decision. Bioware can't compete with the likes of Epic, Infinity Ward, Bungie and ID in terms of creating an intense shooter experience, so why actually remove the 1 component of the game that made it stand out from those other games in the parts where you are shooting people. And if you do decide to remove that component why not add other stuff those games get right. Like the abiltiy to only carry 2 weapons, picking up fallen weapons or a better working cover system.

[Thezezeal]

Railstay wrote...
Anyway, you are running away from the argument no one in the infinite ammo camp wants to address:  How would you adjust the difficulty for a combat system with no reload mechanic and no universal cooldown?  The game would become an exercise in patience again, where you held down your LMB on some krogan whose health is not going down at all, because he popped Immunity and other krogan buddies are coming in with the same defensive mechanics.  All because there is no cap on ammo, and you are able to fire out all your skills in succession.

Apologies if I misunderstand the point you're trying to make, but isn't the patience aspect the point?

In ME1, if you were using a standard weapon (so something that could overheat, with no FMs), you could not hold down fire indefinitely, but instead had to use cover of some sort between shots/cooldown if your weapon overheated. In ME2, the same effect applies-- it seems to me, at least, that the heatsinks just limit the amount of shots, rather than changing the tactical effect.

Personally, I'm not bothered either way-- infinite ammo or heightsink-- but I think Infinite Ammo + Enhanced Resistance to certain Ammo Types + Soldier build would be a good balance; not sure on other builds, however.

[SnowHeart1]

ERJAK2 wrote...

It's a perceived break in the lore that is supposedly geared toward attracting shooter fans. The first part I don't care about, but if you've been to any of the romance threads, you know that the second is rather unpleasant.

QFT.  Not applicable to all, but certainly enough.