115 réponses à ce sujet

[CYCLONE957]

I agree with Taritu, the amount of squad members in ME2 was too high. Jack and Samara had the same powers, why do I need them both? It would have been better to have less squad members but have more conversations. The characters seemed shallow... especially thane. He was emo. also I miss the old Liara. you know the shy, sweet, not homicidal doctor. I would have prefered her to Samara, Jack, or Miranda. And I know it's been said before, but she wasn't even happy to see shepard, even if you chose her as a love interest! I love you, but I hate that you because you died thing was stupid.

[Fox200x2]

I agree when it comes in the absence of fighting with cars in Mass Effect 2. I think at this point, Bioware could improve by placing a vehicle capable of going to places that the Kodiak could not land. Several battles were fantastic the Mako in Mass Effect 1.



Another thing, Shepard is a fan of ships, just look at their cabin in Normandy. Now I wonder: Why Bioware, so far, has not implemented a space combat ?????? A time for the player to be able to control any vehicle in a space combat ???????? It would be interesting.

[Torpasia]

Shavon wrote...

Instead of a whole slew of new squad mates, I think they shoudl just draw from whose already been written. Maybe a few new more, but I don't want Bioware to cater to new people to the extenet that ME2 was. We have 15 or 16 already. THey should just market it differently, have players make sure that as many survive as possible for import, or they won't make it.

They made the suicide mission, getting everyone to survive sound like it would be so hard, but it's really not.

We don't need more romances, just re-open doors from the squadmates that are already available.

Agreed, especially about the romance thing. It would be great to see a relationship develop over three games, slowly building up to a real, actual climax.

Also, Bioware, make sure that you really spend time on ME3. We all want it to be epic, to really see the weight of our choices. Take over five years if you must, but make sure it's the very best it can be.

[Astranagant]

They could make ME3 better by totally doing ME2 over and not taking the focus away from the Reapers and turning it to some minor villain group from ME1 that they suddenly and pointlessly elevated to the center of the galactic stage for no reason except to make Shepard work with "the bad guy" to make it seem more GRIMDARK.

[StingerSplash01]

kinlopunim wrote...

i say we change something simple, like get rid of the f***ing ammo. the first game had it right with the lore and cooldown period. the second game is like, "hey, that thing we invented so we didn't have to worry about ammo...yea, we're getting rid of that in support of ammo."
i want to use my favorite guns to kill people, not whichever gun i have ammo on. seriously im always out of sniper rifle rounds.

another thing to bring back is the equipment / inventory. some ppl feel that this game is better without it, they are the ppl who juice all over gear of war and spit on final fantasy. you made the game more appealing to the general public and kicked the groin of your loyal RPG fanbase.

and one last thing, F the books and F the comics, its great that you want to keep your ME world growing and expanding, but worry about your game before you create the random "side stories".

You obvisously don't understand the reason behind it, and are bringing hate into a civil thread. So I will instead explain both the game mechanical reasons, and lore - based / physics based reasons as to why ammo was added.

First the mechanical reasons: The main reason ammo was added was for balancing reasons, In mass effect 1 the snipers for example were unbalanced to your advantage, while it may be true Infiltrators are a sniper class, if you could swing your doom stick all day long, would you be challenged to put it away, no because it would never fail, so for balanacing reasons ammo was added to make you put away your cannon and fight your way to more rounds, this balances the battle outs and means you have to earn progression on the battle field, the same reasons can be said for any of the weapons, but since all classes have accesss to the pistols, and you should never truely run out ammo for all of your guns the pistols should have infinite ammo but their damage would have be toned back for balancing reasons making the pistols last resort weapons to hold a line or make a break for more ammo.

Now for the lore/physics reasons: In mass effect you don't actually have ammo persay and looking into your codex would lead you this, the guns of mass effect, for all intensive purposes are electromagnetic railguns that uses blocks of steel over old fashioned bullets, when fired the guns targeting and physics processor calculates the distance to your intended target, and most efficeint ballistic tragectory to where you are aiming, and after factoring wind and local gravitational factors among other things will shave off an infinitetesimal(sp?) sliver from the afforementioned steel block and fire it using a mass effect field (which in real life terms would be a incredibally powerful em field) and propel it forward at incredible speed using the electromagnets that run along the barrel. The block of steel would last longer than any number missions, the equivelent of millions of conventional bullets. where ammo comes from is in the form of heat sinks which would be made of copper or any other naturally occuring heat-transfering material. Now this is where the last game actually was wrong, a railgun would generate an enormous amount of heat with each round fired, the heat sink soaks the heat to pervent the guns electronics and other components from melting, but in doing so and after enoughs round are fired which is dependent on the size and muzzle velocity of the round fired, shotguns firing many small rounds which in weight are equivelent to or less then a single sniper round, and pistols firing large bullets at less speeds, the smallest round being that of the assualt rifle and or smg which will tend to be significantlly to slightly smaller then the pistol round. Now this where you say well if don't fire my gun for a while i should never need a new heat sink and thus never need to "reload" my gun, in reality this is wrong because everytime you fire a round the heat sink will be slightly damaged and will eventually become useless due to it being molecularly unfit as a heat sink, and a heat sink would only ever be able to withstand a certain amount of rounds, the heat sinks in our computers aren't prone to this because the amount of heat generated by the computer never exceeds the melting point of the materials in the heat sinks so they remain undamage, the heat generated by a railgun will easily exceed the melting point of the materials it made from so this becomes a factor, these still weigh something and so a person would only be to carry so many heat sinks before they get in the way of them doing their jobs, (your ammo limit).

hope anyone who reads this will finally understand that an "ammo system" is actually need for the game to make sense on top of the game making reasons.

[StingerSplash01]

double post sry but BUMP!

[Bob5312]

Well said, StingerSplash01. I'm not sure I think the ammo system is perfect in ME2 (for example, if all heat sinks are the same, why can I run out of ammo for my assault rifle but still have plenty for my other weapons?) but I found the idea of just having to sit around waiting for my weapon to cool down in ME1 a bit...distressing.

The problem with keeping all of your old squadmates into ME3 is that there are so many possible combinations of events in ME2 that the amount of dialogue that would need to be written and recorded for each character to accomodate them all is overwhelming. I suspect it was these practical considerations that limited the roles of the squadmates from ME1 in this game; how do you make Wrex a central character to the story if there's a possibility he died in the first game? Same for Ashley and Kaidan. The only characters that returned as squadmates were Tali and Garrus, neither of whom was a romance option and neither of whom might have died and thus both of whom had known endings in the first game.

The game has to play out pretty much the same regardless of the choices made previously or the design time would be prohibitively high. Not to mention it would be a waste of resources to design, write, and voice a complex plot involving Tali if she were already dead for a large number of players.

[PSUHammer]

CYCLONE957 wrote...

One more thing... I want my grenades back from ME1. No grenades equal less explosions. And we can't have that!

Um, well, I used the grenade launcher a hell of a lot more in ME2 then I did actual grenades in ME1.  Thought that was a good thing!

[Kaiser Shepard]

Multiple endings.



And with that I mean multiple completely different endings, possibly endgames depending on how you played the series. Continuity won't be important anymore, so why not?

[pillz here]

Keep Mordin in it.

[StingerSplash01]

Bob5312 wrote...

Well said, StingerSplash01. I'm not sure I think the ammo system is perfect in ME2 (for example, if all heat sinks are the same, why can I run out of ammo for my assault rifle but still have plenty for my other weapons?) but I found the idea of just having to sit around waiting for my weapon to cool down in ME1 a bit...distressing.
The problem with keeping all of your old squadmates into ME3 is that there are so many possible combinations of events in ME2 that the amount of dialogue that would need to be written and recorded for each character to accomodate them all is overwhelming. I suspect it was these practical considerations that limited the roles of the squadmates from ME1 in this game; how do you make Wrex a central character to the story if there's a possibility he died in the first game? Same for Ashley and Kaidan. The only characters that returned as squadmates were Tali and Garrus, neither of whom was a romance option and neither of whom might have died and thus both of whom had known endings in the first game.
The game has to play out pretty much the same regardless of the choices made previously or the design time would be prohibitively high. Not to mention it would be a waste of resources to design, write, and voice a complex plot involving Tali if she were already dead for a large number of players.

The Idea behind the separate ammo is for balancing as well as the fact that even in game the sinks for the various guns are in fact different sizes so one heat sink would not fit in another type of weapon but it would be a pain the have to kill a sniper to get sniper ammo so the heat sinks you find on the floor are generalized heat sinks so you could always use a sniper rifle even if there are no snipers in the missions your in which as a matter of fact I have never actually seen an enemy sniper have you.

[ViivraBE]

id like to see posative actions with negaive consequences. like for instance i did good things in ME1 and i only got good responses from those acts.

for instance i helped person A he then comes to me in ME2 and seas thanks and a good thing happens.



i want 2 see.... i help person A in ME1 or 2 and later person B comes along and tells me that person A (needs your help in big touble/ will incriminate u if u dont help, or man given a second chance continues doing what ever and you need to take them out), now you could have simply avoided this problem by avoiding helping them to begin with but you dident so now ur in deep and there are only a few unpleasant ways out, no goody two shoose option here..



u no what im saying?

[Bob5312]

StingerSplash01 wrote...



The Idea behind the separate ammo is for balancing as well as the fact that even in game the sinks for the various guns are in fact different sizes so one heat sink would not fit in another type of weapon but it would be a pain the have to kill a sniper to get sniper ammo so the heat sinks you find on the floor are generalized heat sinks so you could always use a sniper rifle even if there are no snipers in the missions your in which as a matter of fact I have never actually seen an enemy sniper have you.

I believe, though I could be wrong, that the codex says that heat sinks are the same for all non-heavy weapons. Regardless, I am basically agreeing with you. I don't think the system is perfect in ME2 (and no system is ever perfect), but I would argue that it is much improved.

ViivraBE, there actually is a point in ME2 at which what you describe happens, but I can't post it in a no-spoilers forum.

[lukandroll]

StingerSplash01 wrote...

Bob5312 wrote...

Well said, StingerSplash01. I'm not sure I think the ammo system is perfect in ME2 (for example, if all heat sinks are the same, why can I run out of ammo for my assault rifle but still have plenty for my other weapons?) but I found the idea of just having to sit around waiting for my weapon to cool down in ME1 a bit...distressing.
The problem with keeping all of your old squadmates into ME3 is that there are so many possible combinations of events in ME2 that the amount of dialogue that would need to be written and recorded for each character to accomodate them all is overwhelming. I suspect it was these practical considerations that limited the roles of the squadmates from ME1 in this game; how do you make Wrex a central character to the story if there's a possibility he died in the first game? Same for Ashley and Kaidan. The only characters that returned as squadmates were Tali and Garrus, neither of whom was a romance option and neither of whom might have died and thus both of whom had known endings in the first game.
The game has to play out pretty much the same regardless of the choices made previously or the design time would be prohibitively high. Not to mention it would be a waste of resources to design, write, and voice a complex plot involving Tali if she were already dead for a large number of players.

The Idea behind the separate ammo is for balancing as well as the fact that even in game the sinks for the various guns are in fact different sizes so one heat sink would not fit in another type of weapon but it would be a pain the have to kill a sniper to get sniper ammo so the heat sinks you find on the floor are generalized heat sinks so you could always use a sniper rifle even if there are no snipers in the missions your in which as a matter of fact I have never actually seen an enemy sniper have you.

The ammo system need to be revamped to the Hybrid system they were experimenting early on. Basicaly the heat dissipates as long as your don't go to far with it, once the heat is too much you got to manualy eject the the heat clip. Its one of the many points in the "official" suggestions thread.

[StingerSplash01]

But if you go up a few posts I point out the railgun would permanently damage the heat sink with just one shot, so even if you let the heat dissipate you wouldn't  get back your original number of shots it would actually make sense if the gun fires a few shots less then the max if you don't let it dissipate, i will get bashed for that statement as people hate the ammo system but it technically adds realism which i prefer above all else.

Modifié par StingerSplash01, 17 février 2010 - 03:43 .

[Blind Lark]

I 100% support a multiplayer option. There should be a mode that's co-op or single player based where you just kill endless enemies, you can do it with somebody through a local collection or through live, where they can import their own character.

[StingerSplash01]

Co-Op would be possible on a technical level, PvP can't work as it wouldn't balanced, But some Legolas vs. Gimli Kill Streak Battles would be great and would be a way of making co-op competitive and there are ammo dumps in parts of the maps so we don't run out of ammo, New Group in the making People for Mass Effect Suicidal Standoff, aka Horde Mode, aka Firefight. ftw

[StingerSplash01]

bumpity bump

[ViivraBE]

id like to see posative actions with negaive consequences. like for instance i did good things in ME1 and i only got good responses from those acts.

for instance i helped person A he then comes to me in ME2 and seas thanks and a good thing happens.



i want 2 see.... i help person A in ME1 or 2 and later person B comes along and tells me that person A (needs your help in big touble/ will incriminate u if u dont help, or man given a second chance continues doing what ever and you need to take them out), now you could have simply avoided this problem by avoiding helping them to begin with but you dident so now ur in deep and there are only a few unpleasant ways out, no goody two shoose option here..



u no what im saying?

[PSUHammer]

I, for one, am against a multiplayer option. I think there are plenty of games out there that get that right already. Bioware games are great for us single player gamers as they focus solely on the story and single player experience. Adding a multiplayer functionality will bring nothing new to the gaming table and take development resources away from Bioware's core appeal.

[BiancoAngelo7]

wow stinger I dont think Ive ever heard anyone make as much sense out of the ammo mechanic as you did. Bioware should have had you explain why we needed ammo clips lol.

[Jackal904]

There should be no multiplayer in any Mass Effect game period. Not even co-op.

[StingerSplash01]

Thank you I try my best