212 réponses à ce sujet

[Stinkface27]

Firstly, your post is well-written, OP - so thank you for that. I understand what you're saying but I disagree.



I do not understand why people continue to define RPGs as anything other than exactly what they are: role playing games. RPGs are not games that have x, y or z - they are games in which you play a role. The inventory, exploration, xp per kill etc are NOT what makes an RPG an RPG, they are things that have become standard for them, but they are not necessary or genre-making/breaking. BioWare has pushed outside both the RPG box for this game, which they have earned the right to do after all the textbook RPGs they have pumped out.



Another thing I do not understand is why people refuse to accept this coupling of RPG and FPS. Why are you so determined to put Mass Effect in one box or the other? Why can't it be genre-bending?



Personally, I felt that ME2 felt a little bare in some places that were meant to feel streamlined. As if they intended to cut the fat but cut a bit too much of the meat in the process. However, I think that the direction they took in this game was a big improvement over ME1, in many of the places where others feel it was "RPG light".



Just my 2 cents.

[Invalidcode]

ME2 talents are a lot better, learn to combo/link it with your teammates/your own other powers.



For example:



Pull-Throw

Pull-Wrap

Singularity-chain wraps

Cryo blast-biotic charge

Cryo blast-concussive shot

Area reave- double inferno grenade & watch the world burn

There are a lot more.



ME1 talent? lol immunity.

[Cross1280]

banshee768 wrote...

Funny. I just returned to ME1 to get a female soldier for ME2 and I hate it. I've completed the first 2 main missions and can't bring myself to continue. Unfortunately that means I won't be able to play ME2 either, because the default decisions suck. Lose-lose situation.

Not sure what Platform you play on, but on 360 you have th option to change your class when you Import an ME1 save, I imported my lvl 60 Infiltrator with the choices i wanted and made him a Sentinal in ME2. with all the bonuses of an import.

[AtreiyaN7]

Paperghost wrote...

they removed:

* overly large hubworlds stuffed with fetchquests and endless slogging from point A to B
* tons of dead space
* frankly terrible "exploration" / mako missions
* mako padding inserted into the main plot levels
* one of the worst inventory systems I've ever seen
* the pointlessness of an inventory system where everyone just uses spectre weapons and one type of armour
* a bunch of other minor issues that dragged the original title down somewhat.

what's left in ME2 is pretty much ME1 but without many of the screwups listed above. ME2 is what ME1 should have been, without all the mostly redundant rpg trappings that should never have found their way into the mix. Honestly, I think some people would be happier if bioware just released KOTOR every two years. Just draw the number 3 onto the front of your ME1 box, because the things you want are never coming back - thank goodness.

I will quote what the wise poster said. They stripped out things that were awkward in ME1, rolled some of them over into research and eliminated what wasn't working. Hopefully the future Hammerhead will be what the Mako should have been, because the Mako was something of a pain. Now I love both games, but ME1 wasn''t perfect (neither is ME2). I sure as heck do not want to go back to the horror that was inventory management in ME1. If they can come up with something in between that couldn't hurt, but if I had to choose between the two, I'd go with the ME2 system. Also, I generally find any arguments that EA is somehow responsible for BioWare's direction to be specious.

[MPaBkaTa123]

These topics are immortal, seriously won't you people just give up either bioware has already read the 2876142632907 billion topics saying the same thing or they don't care either way stop making them.

Squad armor would indeed be a fun feature but i can live with it being an RPG does not mean having to include pointless passive skills that improve minimally each time and only give the illusion of progression. Also i miss weapon mods those were awesome.

[obie191970]

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

These topics are immortal

You added a 't' into that last word by mistake.

[ArcanistLibram]

Because RPGs are all about an XP system that overwhelming favours violent options over noncombat options and a large number of redundant/useless skills with a dozen ranks that provide minuscule increases in ability.

[MPaBkaTa123]

obie191970 wrote...

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

These topics are immortal

You added a 't' into that last word by mistake.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

At the very least dont hide like cowards behind terms like "streamlined" to disguise "massive cutbacks".

The way armour was handled wasnt too bad, but it was FAR too limited. A few pieces per section wasnt going to cut it, considering you cut out ALL teammate armour. This really required a hell of a lot more effort than it actually got. Also weapons should have got a similar treatment, where "upgrading" offers more freedom than incremental bonuses. You cant customise weapons in any way. Just slightly up their performance. That is unequivocally more boring than ME1. At least there you could tailor weapons to certain enemies and playstyles.

Some people out there are happy to sell off ME2s "inventory"/RPG combat as an improvement. I respectfully disagree. Some morons out there like to insult anyone who disagrees. I disrespectfully tell them where to shove it.

ME1 and ME2 both had the same flaw in their "inventory system". I was blandness. ME2 just scaled back the blandness so there was less choice, but you didnt really gain anything.

As for powers. Biotics sucks in ME2 on higher difficulties, and on easier difficulties its too damned easy. Basically its been broken and needs fixing. Insanity forces you to spend far too much time "debuffing" enemies to actually use your powers. By the time you get to, they are killed so easily its over before it starts. Its finishing moves, and its tedious.

Squadmates need more powers, and more customisation over them in ME3. They really felt much weaker than the ME1 teammates, and considering they are supposed to be the "best", who help you survive the suicide mission, they were more often than not a total embarrassment.

If youre going to continue with ME3 as a bland cover based whack-a-mole shooter made for morons, at least have the decency to tell us, and not hide behind disingenuous terms.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 11 février 2010 - 06:57 .

[MPaBkaTa123]

Really Dinkamus insulting people is not really the best way to persuade them of anything. Less choice in ME2 don't make me laugh. Heavy weapons alone offered more variations of weapons then all of ME1, do not confuse "more damage and accuracy" for choice. There was one choice in armors that is Collosus or Predator that's it.But since i won't be able to change your opinion anyway i'll just say that i prefer whack a mole to holding the fire button.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

Really Dinkamus insulting people is not really the best way to persuade them of anything.

Really? You figure that out by yourself did you? You dont think maybe thats why I tell them where to shove it?

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...
Less choice in ME2 don't make me laugh. Heavy weapons alone offered more variations of weapons then all of ME1, do not confuse "more damage and accuracy" for choice. There was one choice in armors that is Collosus or Predator that's it.But since i won't be able to change your opinion anyway i'll just say that i prefer whack a mole to holding the fire button.

Heavy weapons were a pointless exercise in ME2. Its the kind of flashly "look at this" mentality that let ME2 down. Even the nuke gun was stupid. For the amount of shots it gives you, I expect it to insta kill every enemy in the game bar the last boss (which I doubt anyone woudl hit most of the time anyway).

Instead on insanity it only takes a praetor down to half health.

Every other heavy weapon is just a slightly more powerful way of doing what ME2s combat is all about: emerge from combat and whack that mole!

And please, dont talk to me like I think ME1 had a picture perfect inventory and weapons system. It was as flawed as ME2s is. It just wasnt designed to pander to the shooter demographic filled with idiots. Mass Effect 2 is just as flawed as ME1 in many regards. Just because it approaches the same flaw from a new angle doesnt change a thing. You are stuck with a certain type of weapon for the entire game, and the only way to improve it is slightly increase its damage/acurracy/ammo load. Sound familar? Oh thats right, its just like ME1s I to X system, only slightly less cluttered, but just as boring.

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 11 février 2010 - 07:12 .

[wrdnshprd]

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

Really Dinkamus insulting people is not really the best way to persuade them of anything. Less choice in ME2 don't make me laugh. Heavy weapons alone offered more variations of weapons then all of ME1, do not confuse "more damage and accuracy" for choice. There was one choice in armors that is Collosus or Predator that's it.But since i won't be able to change your opinion anyway i'll just say that i prefer whack a mole to holding the fire button.

i think the reason Dinkamus said what he/she did was simply because most people that prefer ME2 over ME1 and are completely in favor of ME2s direction, are generally the ones spewing the insults.  god forbid people want to give constructive criticizm to a gaming company

[Nautica773]

I would be happy with just the removal of the dialogue wheel and instead a return of the list response. I'm tired of making a "choice" only to have Shepard do something completely unanticipated. If I wanted to just watch a character going through a story, I'd put in a movie.



(Not to even mention that the dialogue wheel requires the use of the Paragon/Renegade alignment system to work and that this alignment system is silly and hinders the exploration of 'morally grey' territory.)

[MPaBkaTa123]

Urm... why do you insult me i haven't really said anything to you beside saying my opinion. If you find shooter players to be idiots then why do you play ME2 that explicitly showed the fact that it was a SHOOTER/RPG. Also if you find both games equally flawed and apparently found ME2 to be targeting idiots as its demographic then why did you buy it? Anyway our discussion is pointless neither of us will be able to persuade the other.

Edit:This is targeted at Dinkamus no offense to anyone

Modifié par MPaBkaTa123, 11 février 2010 - 07:23 .

[NvVanity]

I like the system the way it is now. But it could use some more skills. Bringing back weapon skills (for the purpose of overkill, marksmen, assassination and carnage only) would be nice as well as giving our teammates more abilities.



The RPG system is here but it's really toned down, nothing DLC from bioware can't fix.

[FlintlockJazz]

wrdnshprd wrote...

Paxcorpus wrote...

My god, I am so sick of the idiots out here. RPG DOES NOT MEAN large inventories and loot farming.

GET

A

GRIP

i think the more accurate statement is.. YOUR definition of RPG does not constitute large inventories and loot farming..

tradition would dictate otherwise.

Actually tradition would not dictate otherwise.  There has always been a schism between roleplayers and rollplayers, especially among tabletop: some play for stats, for getting the best loot etc, while others play to take on the role of their character, making choices that may even cost them phat loot because that's what their character would do, and not really bothering with stats but the role they are playing.  Both are right, they are just different forms of roleplay, it's just that people don't seem to understand that RPG covers a larger array of playstyles than they realise, just look at the differences between many other cRPGs from Final Fantasy to Baldur's Gate, from Oblivion to Diablo, from Deus Ex to Baldur's Gate, there are vast differences. 

Sci-Fi covers stories about the future, but within that can be Cyberpunk, Space Opera, Hard Science etc, all vastly different to one another and yet all still Science Fiction. 

So, to sum up, tradition would not dictate otherwise, as a longtime roleplayer of both cRPGs and tabletop as well as live, I have seen many different forms, and while ME2 may not fall within some people's style of roleplay, it is still an RPG, and in many ways more of an RPG than most other RPGs I have played in a long while.

[FlintlockJazz]

wrdnshprd wrote...

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

Really Dinkamus insulting people is not really the best way to persuade them of anything. Less choice in ME2 don't make me laugh. Heavy weapons alone offered more variations of weapons then all of ME1, do not confuse "more damage and accuracy" for choice. There was one choice in armors that is Collosus or Predator that's it.But since i won't be able to change your opinion anyway i'll just say that i prefer whack a mole to holding the fire button.

i think the reason Dinkamus said what he/she did was simply because most people that prefer ME2 over ME1 and are completely in favor of ME2s direction, are generally the ones spewing the insults.  god forbid people want to give constructive criticizm to a gaming company

Really?  I would have to disagree, there has been abuse thrown about by both sides, those in support of the game get lambasted just for giving their constructive criticism (showing appproval for what you liked is also helpful to the devs so they know what not to cut), and there is also a significant difference between constructive criticism and the downright hating and trolling that has been going on here.

[Br0th3rGr1mm]

@Dinkamous - Your condisending tone is insulting and your holier than thou attitude over a video game direction is almost ammusing. You are complaining about semantics of how the game was marketed. You obviously have your own opinion of the game, so why is that such a big deal?

Your signature makes me wonder if you actually played ME1....you do realize that the story doesn't make much sense if ALL 3 of those are squadmates again....unless your are suggesting that you get a zombie husk squadmate for one of the three.

[MPaBkaTa123]

Frankly the only thing that really annoys me are the personal insults being thrown around. The ,,fanbois" throw around generic swears and insults at people with different opinions whereas the haters just claim that everyone who likes the game is an idiot with no taste. Both are wrong but way too many topics have devolved into pointless flamewars because of some random personal insult.

[grieferbastard]

Some people want a game for replayability, some for a good, thrilling visceral ride and then move on. ME2 is less option 1 and more option 2. I'd say both are full of RP.

However, most people who've gotten DA:O will get 200+ hours of playtime out of it. Some of us closer to 400+ hours of enjoyment. Can ME2 say the same? It's not the inventory system per se. It was the sense of customization. It wasn't driving around in the mako per se it was the broader sense of involvement with the environment. Wider range of options.

Six of one, half a dozen of another. ME2 will do very well. It should, it's an awesome game. It's not targetted at the same market as DA:O though. For me, it feels too 'console'. My cellphone literally has a better processor and more memory than an Xbox360. It also has a more dynamic interface. It is however 30-40 hours of brilliant interactive movie. When it's in the $10-$20 range I'll pick it up on D2D and run through it once or twice, bring my guy over from ME1 to enjoy.

Then I'll probably go back to DA:O, which I paid full price for and will buy all the DLC for the day they come out and spend yet another 120+ hours on a single playthrough.

Said it before, will say it again. ME2 is an awesome game. Beautiful, well designed, more clearly pointed at its target market than ME1 was. A rich and engaging piece of cinema. I may not be the target market for this product but that doesn't make it bad. Quit trying to change what franchise ME is. It's a cinematic RP shooter. Not a classical RPG. It never was and the whole gameworld doesn't fit as well into it. It's about rich drama, blowing **** up and sex with aliens. ME2 is a better example of ME than ME1 is. That's not a bad thing.

Modifié par grieferbastard, 11 février 2010 - 07:37 .

[Cancermeat]

I like shooters and i like rpgs, i dont know how i feel about them meshed together, well i guess its better than turned based.

[MPaBkaTa123]

grieferbastard wrote...

Some people want a game for replayability, some for a good, thrilling visceral ride and then move on. ME2 is less option 1 and more option 2. I'd say both are full of RP.

However, most people who've gotten DA:O will get 200+ hours of playtime out of it. Some of us closer to 400+ hours of enjoyment. Can ME2 say the same? It's not the inventory system per se. It was the sense of customization. It wasn't driving around in the mako per se it was the broader sense of involvement with the environment. Wider range of options.

Six of one, half a dozen of another. ME2 will do very well. It should, it's an awesome game. It's not targetted at the same market as DA:O though. For me, it feels too 'console'. My cellphone literally has a better processor and more memory than an Xbox360. It also has a more dynamic interface. It is however 30-40 hours of brilliant interactive movie. When it's in the $10-$20 range I'll pick it up on D2D and run through it once or twice, bring my guy over from ME1 to enjoy.

Then I'll probably go back to DA:O, which I paid full price for and will buy all the DLC for the day they come out and spend yet another 120+ hours on a single playthrough.

Said it before, will say it again. ME2 is an awesome game. Beautiful, well designed, more clearly pointed at its target market than ME1 was. A rich and engaging piece of cinema. I may not be the target market for this product but that doesn't make it bad. Quit trying to change what franchise ME is. It's a cinematic RP shooter. Not a classical RPG. It never was and the whole gameworld doesn't fit as well into it. It's about rich drama, blowing **** up and sex with aliens. ME2 is a better example of ME than ME1 is. That's not a bad thing.

 QFT 

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Br0th3rGr1mm wrote...

@Dinkamous - Your condisending tone is insulting and your holier than thou attitude over a video game direction is almost ammusing. You are complaining about semantics of how the game was marketed. You obviously have your own opinion of the game, so why is that such a big deal?
Your signature makes me wonder if you actually played ME1....you do realize that the story doesn't make much sense if ALL 3 of those are squadmates again....unless your are suggesting that you get a zombie husk squadmate for one of the three.

Whats the matter brothergrimm, you feel yourself included in my attacks? Thats your own damn fault for resorting to petty insults yourself in the first place.

If your problem is with the "shooter idiots", that insult is deliberately non-specific. Many shooter fans are idiots, and many of them have come on here "whining about whining".

In short: read better.

[MPaBkaTa123]

And yet you put yourself into the same wagon as him by insulting his intelligence.