81 réponses à ce sujet

[DarthReavus]

therhollywood wrote...

i think they need to recall this
game and say it was a joke releas then go back to the board and try
again. first whats with the ammo?? if any one was paying any attention
to me1 they explained that now EA sticks there fingers in o we need to
make them pick up ammo now????? and whats with the only having 1 armor
why cant i find new armor. and why don't i have all the guns but just
not trained on them? it seams like they too most of the god parts of
me1 tossed them out the window and said lets replace them with
cr*p

Would you like a glass of whine with that?

Modifié par DarthReavus, 05 février 2010 - 05:50 .

[primal456]

I'm a huge RPG fan and a huge Bioware fan I have a few issues with ME2. BUT with that said my issues are minor and I know some of it is the fact I HATE when they change a good rpg with stuff that I feel is unneeded.



Now at first I HATED the combat I suck at 1st person shooters, but after a couple of hours I found that the combat was in some respects better. YOU HIT WHAT YOU AIM AT!!! I really disliked assualt rifles in the first 1 you missed more than you hit. Hated the sniper rifle fricken scope wouldn't stay still, but in ME2 I can aim and hit with the Sniper Rifle. The story is excellent more robust. I will admit that I wish there were more interactions with the characters but can't **** to much.



Issues 2 the gas and scanning. I hate the scanning, once you get the upgrade scanning gets easier so I wish the 1st scanner was a little faster but I can live with that. The gas situation is dumb, why introduce a mechanic that doesn't add anything to the game play other than a waste of time.



Now I hear alot of complianing about the innventory system got to admit other than wishing for more choices for the main characters armor and maybe a real alternate costume for the other characters it doesn't bother me. I'll admit I spent all my run throughs in the original trying to get the krogan battlemaster armor and the colossus x armors for the rest. Can't say I miss the Mako though that I didn't like at all.

[Delta426]

ME2 sucks, they dumbed it down for idiot shooter players, who can't appreciate sifting through endless lists of repeat items just to find awesome loot. Shooting a bad guy in the head is easy! Try casting 6 different abilities and spraying the room with indiscriminat fire, now that takes intelligence and decision making. Oh I have to reaload now? And I always run out of ammo cuz I can't hit anything. And I can't upgrade my armor to be indestructible anymore so I have to take cover. The game just sucks.
And the game salesman on the citadel made fun of me. I do miss those old games, where you had to remember to drink water.

Modifié par Delta426, 05 février 2010 - 06:02 .

[Darth Drago]

If this somewhat of a response to my topic I have to say a few quick things.



1. You need to have a topic header and subject matter that stands out to get attention. I had heard about all the gripes (valid or not) from the first game and how BioWare tried to make changes to make their customers happy. That is what a company should do and I respect them for that. If there is no one commenting on whats wrong with the game then they cant fix the problems or at least consider that what they changed from ME1 may not have been the next great idea.



2. I love BioWare and have for years. I consider them one of the best RPG company’s in the field. As a fan of RPG games it does get under my skin when what I consider extreme changes are made to a franchise that messes up the continuality of the series. Evolve it to make it better but don’t drop things or mess them up completely. This is part of the reason why I gave up on the Final Fantasy series.



3. A RPG game dose not require turn based combat. Its about immersing yourself into a story and interacting with the characters in that story.

[Jaysonie]

I personally think a majority of the "Complainers" are pc users, who tend to be much more extreme in there "complaining".

Delta426 wrote...

ME2 sucks, they dumbed it down for idiot shooter players, who can't appreciate sifting through endless lists of repeat items just to find awesome loot. Shooting a bad guy in the head is easy! Try casting 6 different abilities and spraying the room with indiscriminat fire, now that takes intelligence and decision making. Oh I have to reaload now? And I always run out of ammo cuz I can't hit anything. And I can't upgrade my armor to be indestructible anymore so I have to take cover. The game just sucks.

The game your describing does not sound like fun.

[therhollywood]

i said nothing about rpgs but if you go to your codecs in me1 they explain why you don't have to keep running and picking up ammo which in that time would make sines. rpg action game dose not matter to me i went out and got me2 because i loved the play of me1 only to find out that they completely removed almost all the good stuff and the good stuff they didnt remove they toned it down like the sex sean wtf still unknown what taila looks like. i like picking up new armor i hate the fact that i look almost the same as when i started the game i hate that im still using the same guns as when i started the game. i hate that they didnt make more side missions that tied in to the main story like they did in the first one all side missions feal like they dont go any where or do any thing. i do like that they changed the what you do on the side missions. it just seams to me that they didnt put alot of time or effort into the story. and that its unbelievable short i can beat this game in a day where as it takes about a week to beat me1.



they did change some things for the better but alot of things they did an epic fail on this game falls flat on its face in my honest opinion especially with the asair from the first one that was my love interest only to find out she had a lobotomy and is no longer the same person. and whats with the my choice dose not make a real impact on the game. one way or another the conversation ends the same save for a few minor differences and while im at it WTF is with the citadel why i cant walk around any more is beyond me they totaly could have kept it and did some good missions on there but for some reason they decided that no thats a bad idea. apparently bioware has had a lobotomy and there not the better for it

[Jaysonie]

I cant fiqure out how to deleate a post. go fiqure.

Modifié par Jaysonie, 05 février 2010 - 06:07 .

[I Pyrrhus I]

I don't see why RPGs have to be shoehorned into this homogeneous genre definition that seems to prevail.



I for one am pleased to see some RPGs move away from the archaic system of spreadsheet management. A game does not have to be some glorified D20 character sheet to be an RPG, which is not to say that I don't appreciate that system as well.



Reducing some barriers to entry is a great way to expand the appeal of the genre and is great for Bioware and for fans who will enjoy the benefits of larger development budgets in a fun genre. The only cost is a little bit of compromise which is something everyone can use a little practice at.

[primal456]

Delta426 wrote...

ME2 sucks, they dumbed it down for idiot shooter players, who can't appreciate sifting through endless lists of repeat items just to find awesome loot. Shooting a bad guy in the head is easy! Try casting 6 different abilities and spraying the room with indiscriminat fire, now that takes intelligence and decision making. Oh I have to reaload now? And I always run out of ammo cuz I can't hit anything. And I can't upgrade my armor to be indestructible anymore so I have to take cover. The game just sucks.

I suck at shooters but the learning curse is easy enough in ME2 that I have no trouble hitting the bad guys just takes a few extra hits cause I'm still not great at aiming. Not a huge fan of the ammo decision but I can live with it. But your complaint is you can't be indestructable? The needing to take cover makes it intresting I got to the point in ME1 that I could bulldoze through a level which is cool but sometimes not as much fun. I like the Challenge of WORKING to beat a game so long as said games doesn't make it impossible to beat it. The upgrades you can do in ME2 to improve your armors damage protection means the enemies have a harder time doing damage to you. Also the upgrade to the teams AI for the most part works well but sometimes they are morons. The FPS games I've played that had squads the AI was pathetic in the extreme.

[CatatonicMan]

I Pyrrhus I wrote...

I don't see why RPGs have to be shoehorned into this homogeneous genre definition that seems to prevail.

I for one am pleased to see some RPGs move away from the archaic system of spreadsheet management. A game does not have to be some glorified D20 character sheet to be an RPG, which is not to say that I don't appreciate that system as well.

Reducing some barriers to entry is a great way to expand the appeal of the genre and is great for Bioware and for fans who will enjoy the benefits of larger development budgets in a fun genre. The only cost is a little bit of compromise which is something everyone can use a little practice at.

For me, the cost of the 'compromise' was removing the soul from the game, the thing that made the original great.

It is not mass effect any more; instead, it is some simulacrum wearing its face.

[therhollywood]

CatatonicMan wrote...

I Pyrrhus I wrote...

I don't see why RPGs have to be shoehorned into this homogeneous genre definition that seems to prevail.

I for one am pleased to see some RPGs move away from the archaic system of spreadsheet management. A game does not have to be some glorified D20 character sheet to be an RPG, which is not to say that I don't appreciate that system as well.

Reducing some barriers to entry is a great way to expand the appeal of the genre and is great for Bioware and for fans who will enjoy the benefits of larger development budgets in a fun genre. The only cost is a little bit of compromise which is something everyone can use a little practice at.

For me, the cost of the 'compromise' was removing the soul from the game, the thing that made the original great.

It is not mass effect any more; instead, it is some simulacrum wearing its face.

no my friend said it best this sems more like a spinoff than the actule game which feals about right.

[TheLastAwakening]

No I don't think all the complaints are from hardcore rpg fans. Some complaints make sense since according to lore weapons can overheat vs needing ammo, but is it really game breaking? I don't think so. Other things like the lack of choice in customizing a player character I think falls more into the shades of gray. For example ME 2 did away with the need to invest points into weapon proficiency and usage, and instead allowed the player to be proficient at and use a particular weapon based on their class. Like really does it make sense to have a handicap soldier character who can't use sniper riffles either efficiently or at all early in the game because I don't have enough points to invest into that skill yet?

If anything Bioware dumbed downed the game to meet the IQ of some of the complainers... while simultaneously allowing for an ease into the genre for new comers.

[theeyeisblind]

sure the combat is improved but the character driven quests are completely souless in this game. remember the bhatia quest? or the main cerberus quests? and wheres our "virmire" moment?

the side quests in this game are soulless and completely unfullfilling,

[Jalem001]

theeyeisblind wrote...

sure the combat is improved but the character driven quests are completely souless in this game. remember the bhatia quest? or the main cerberus quests? and wheres our "virmire" moment?

the side quests in this game are soulless and completely unfullfilling,

Like half the side quests aren't even in the game.  I didn't enjoy the side quests either (with the exception of a few, such as the one where you're on the ship about to fall off a cliff.   That was awesome), but I'm reserving judgement until we see the Hammerhead missions.

[therhollywood]

TheLastAwakening wrote...

No I don't think all the complaints are from hardcore rpg fans. Some complaints make sense since according to lore weapons can overheat vs needing ammo, but is it really game breaking? I don't think so. Other things like the lack of choice in customizing a player character I think falls more into the shades of gray. For example ME 2 did away with the need to invest points into weapon proficiency and usage, and instead allowed the player to be proficient at and use a particular weapon based on their class. Like really does it make sense to have a handicap soldier character who can't use sniper riffles either efficiently or at all early in the game because I don't have enough points to invest into that skill yet?
If anything Bioware dumbed downed the game to meet the IQ of some of the complainers... while simultaneously allowing for an ease into the genre for new comers.

But thats the point you can put points in the sniper rifle if your would like. but if you want to go and put those points els where thats your choice as well. i liked the old system ok maybe the items screens were a bit wonky but that could have been easly fixed with a few minor updates i didnt think they would just do away with it entirly. i liked sifting throu all the armor and wepons to find some good armor and a good wepon. and what i may concider good some one els may call it crap but it still left a choce now its all gone.

and why whould you try and open it up to a braoder scean they had a prety big fan base as it was there was no need to open it up or dumb it down. i think ea got there hand a little too far into it if you ask me. every game company ea has goten a hold of has turned into a compleat pile of crap. just look at what they did with C&C i loved that game genreals was ok but after that it was one dumbed down clone after the next like thay were not even trying IMO EA needs to go banckrupt so they will finly keep there greedy gruby paws off games becuase they dont know what the hell there doing.

[I Pyrrhus I]

CatatonicMan wrote...

I Pyrrhus I wrote...

I don't see why RPGs have to be shoehorned into this homogeneous genre definition that seems to prevail.

I for one am pleased to see some RPGs move away from the archaic system of spreadsheet management. A game does not have to be some glorified D20 character sheet to be an RPG, which is not to say that I don't appreciate that system as well.

Reducing some barriers to entry is a great way to expand the appeal of the genre and is great for Bioware and for fans who will enjoy the benefits of larger development budgets in a fun genre. The only cost is a little bit of compromise which is something everyone can use a little practice at.

For me, the cost of the 'compromise' was removing the soul from the game, the thing that made the original great.

It is not mass effect any more; instead, it is some simulacrum wearing its face.

Not sure how to respond to this since you didn't mention anything specific in any of your posts. I can certainly understand being upset with a change of mechanics when you were expecting more of the same. I don't agree, however, for me the soul of the game was the cinematic quality of the dialog. But thats just my opinion vs yours.

I guess you just have to manage your expectations, I know that I had  quite a disappointment with DAO due to my expectations. For some reason I had it in my head that it was going to be freeroam like oblivion (not sure where I got that from), and thanks to that expectation I have struggled to enjoy it as the great game it is.

Expections or not though, doesn't make it any less of an RPG. Not to me anyway, I don't see RPGs as requiring loot and character sheets.

[I Pyrrhus I]

therhollywood wrote...

TheLastAwakening wrote...

No I don't think all the complaints are from hardcore rpg fans. Some complaints make sense since according to lore weapons can overheat vs needing ammo, but is it really game breaking? I don't think so. Other things like the lack of choice in customizing a player character I think falls more into the shades of gray. For example ME 2 did away with the need to invest points into weapon proficiency and usage, and instead allowed the player to be proficient at and use a particular weapon based on their class. Like really does it make sense to have a handicap soldier character who can't use sniper riffles either efficiently or at all early in the game because I don't have enough points to invest into that skill yet?
If anything Bioware dumbed downed the game to meet the IQ of some of the complainers... while simultaneously allowing for an ease into the genre for new comers.

But thats the point you can put points in the sniper rifle if your would like. but if you want to go and put those points els where thats your choice as well. i liked the old system ok maybe the items screens were a bit wonky but that could have been easly fixed with a few minor updates i didnt think they would just do away with it entirly. i liked sifting throu all the armor and wepons to find some good armor and a good wepon. and what i may concider good some one els may call it crap but it still left a choce now its all gone.

and why whould you try and open it up to a braoder scean they had a prety big fan base as it was there was no need to open it up or dumb it down. i think ea got there hand a little too far into it if you ask me. every game company ea has goten a hold of has turned into a compleat pile of crap. just look at what they did with C&C i loved that game genreals was ok but after that it was one dumbed down clone after the next like thay were not even trying IMO EA needs to go banckrupt so they will finly keep there greedy gruby paws off games becuase they dont know what the hell there doing.

I don't see any real evidence that EA has dictated the terms of development on this game. Appealing to a broader audience makes perfect sense from business perspective (EA or not). If they had changed nothing, just as many people would complain that it was a copy/paste of the first and EA forced them to do it to save money.

[madvibe]

I think that one of the reasons that people are not as happy with the game is because of less choice. In the fisrt game you had more choice over how you wanted to set up your character and and squad mates A lot of these choices were taken away from the player. RPGs are all about choice and customizing your own experience and that is why (and this is just my opinoin) a lot of RPG fans are disatisfied. ME 1 set a standard of choice that ME 2 didn't realize. ME 2 is a great game and if it came out first I don't think many would have had a problem.

[Taiko Roshi]

I personally blame the school system for all of the complaints. Down with the current school system in your country I say, its always the systems fault.

[theeyeisblind]

I Pyrrhus I wrote...

Not sure how to respond to this since you didn't mention anything specific in any of your posts. I can certainly understand being upset with a change of mechanics when you were expecting more of the same. I don't agree, however, for me the soul of the game was the cinematic quality of the dialog. But thats just my opinion vs yours.

I guess you just have to manage your expectations, I know that I had  quite a disappointment with DAO due to my expectations. For some reason I had it in my head that it was going to be freeroam like oblivion (not sure where I got that from), and thanks to that expectation I have struggled to enjoy it as the great game it is.

Expections or not though, doesn't make it any less of an RPG. Not to me anyway, I don't see RPGs as requiring loot and character sheets.

i get your dissapointment with DAO especially since fallout 3 and oblivion hd spoiled me on sandbox and active combat (as opposed to DAO's glorified turn base). and this is coming from a baldurs gate fanatic

anyways for me the soul of ME was stuff like the "virmire decision" and the character driven quests. remember the music on ilos when you are talking to the hologram? that music put me in a different place than the rest of the game did and it was a powerful moment. i REALLY wanted to kill saren for his actions and i loved sticking it to the council (especially the turian). or what about the conclusion of the main UNC quest and the anger at cerberus?

the quests in ME2 are completely soulless and i had very little anticipation for a single damn one of them ( except for the loyalty missions). i really had little derision towards the collectors and i couldn't care less about blood pack mercs. this game felt more like a bullrush through the terminus system rather than any quest to save and improve the universe

another gripe was how the romances seemed "forced" rather than actual romances. lol its as if they were a homework assignment to the characters where the payoff is getting laid rather than appreciating the person.

[jtd00123]

therhollywood wrote...

i think they need to recall this game and say it was a joke releas then go back to the board and try again. first whats with the ammo?? if any one was paying any attention to me1 they explained that now EA sticks there fingers in o we need to make them pick up ammo now????? and whats with the only having 1 armor why cant i find new armor. and why don't i have all the guns but just not trained on them? it seams like they too most of the god parts of me1 tossed them out the window and said lets replace them with cr*p

This is so over-the-top it has to be a satire, right?  Well you proved the OP's point, whether you knew it or not.

Modifié par jtd00123, 05 février 2010 - 07:35 .

[Coughee Brotha]

madvibe wrote...

I think that one of the reasons that people are not as happy with the game is because of less choice. In the fisrt game you had more choice over how you wanted to set up your character and and squad mates A lot of these choices were taken away from the player. RPGs are all about choice and customizing your own experience and that is why (and this is just my opinoin) a lot of RPG fans are disatisfied. ME 1 set a standard of choice that ME 2 didn't realize. ME 2 is a great game and if it came out first I don't think many would have had a problem.

True. I miss a lot of the choices too.  For the people saying ME2 ammo goes against the lore, there is information in the codex explaining ammo.  It said something like they found out that thermal clips were more powerful after studying geth technology.  It follows the lore as time and technology changes.  You can argue against or for ammo mechanics though.  I dont mean to offend anyone when I mean "hardcore rpg-fans".  I see that many people were expecting more of a rpg with shooter elements instead of a Shooter with RPG elements.  I understand people not liking the scanning but does that really make it a bad game?  Its only one aspect.  I saw one poster state that RPG=turn-based style.  I disagree.  Role-playing game means you as a person is playing the role of a character. I thought it had more to do with customization and following a path you wanted to and choosing the dialogue the player would prefer.  There are sub-genre to RPG

[jtd00123]

another gripe was how the romances seemed "forced" rather than actual romances. lol its as if they were a homework assignment to the characters where the payoff is getting laid rather than appreciating the person.

Way off on that one buddy. They are much more developed this time, minus Miranda's, Kelly's and Jacob's. (that is the only way you could have came to that conclusion, and in that case you should change your plural  in "characters" to  singular)  Honestly, in comparison to ME2, ME1 had no build-up when it came to the romance, no chemistry. Thane's romance was probably one of the better I've seen in gaming history.

Modifié par jtd00123, 05 février 2010 - 07:42 .

[Frotality]

"after they worked so hard to fix the thiings we didnt like in the first game."

but they didnt. they removed them. it is very easy to understand. ME2 is a checkerboard: for every wonderful little nod to the desires of the fans is a punch in their face waiting to counter it.

there are alot of things (blasto reference, tali/garrusmance) that were great additions on theri part showing how they listened to the fans, but there was alot more were they basically ignored them,  mostly out of ignorance probably. alot complained about the mako, clunky inventory and useless equipment variety, but somehow bioware got improve=remove from that. it isnt that the game isnt good; i love it, but its the new direction it went in i take issue with. we dont want a new direction, we want the same old shiite Bioware has been making for years, but improved. bioware wanted to revolutionize RPGs, but regardless of their success, they forgot the reason most revolutions fail or never last is because the people never wanted them. ME2 has simplifeid alot of which needed more complexity to appeal to us. they gave us a great game, but isnt the game we asked for, too much is different, too much is changed for no good reason. they improved the action, but all they improved about the RPG elements is making them conform to the action, instead of the other way around like people expected. unexpected doesnt always equal bad of course, but in this case its not a pleasant surprise; its just a surprise: not good or bad in itself, but a surprise with no real purpose that no one wanted.

[jtd00123]

I've been playing RPGs since Ultima. Hardcore CRPG fans, by definition, wouldn't be playing any game made by Bioware (except maybe BG) and certainly not ME1. These people claim they are hardcore when they have no idea what one means. ME1 was made to target the shooter market. In ME2 they succeeded. It is a great game if you look at it as a whole rather than a monovision of what constitutes as an RPG. If you don't like shooters, fine. But why the hell did you buy ME1 for to begin with?

Modifié par jtd00123, 05 février 2010 - 07:52 .