179 réponses à ce sujet

[EvilChani]

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

Dethateer wrote...

Which was a huge problem in the beginning, because snipers, for example wobbled around, and you had to wait for the perfect moment to press the trigger, which requires faster reflexes than this. Incidentally, I usually failed at that. My reflexes suck.

I have to agree with you about the Sniper Rifle, but then again it didn't require a 'baby and bathwater' approach to it either.

I don't understand the problem with the sniper rifle in ME1. In the beginning, when you had no skill using it, it made sense for it to wobble around. Once you get points in the skill, it got much easier. By the end, when I had maxed the ability, I could use the sniper rifle not just to snipe - easily and accurately - but I used it as a close range weapon and shot my enemies in the face, to their demise. That, really, is one reason I have complained about the combat in ME2. In ME1, Shep's shooting abilities were largely on her (or him); in ME2, it's all about the player. I prefer the former to the latter and, since this is supposed to be a RPG, then the playable character's abilities should definitely depend more on her/his skill rather than the player's abilities with a controller or keyboard.

[Irenicusss]

When we speak about RPG's we don't put aiming skills as a factor, 'cause the skills of your CHARACTER are what matters and the closest related to is is the sniper and the headshots being implemented. Thats why we don't need numbers for accuracy, stability, dmg. etc. 'cause the RPG element is nerfed and thats a fact. Well interesting even for me It didn't bother me but someone said that snipers in ME1 were lame and stuff. Well, my fav. char is Infiltrator on both games, and with the sniper skills the right mods and ammo in ME1 i kill collosi alone on hardcore. I even play with it in close range, because of good stability and accuracy and dmg. I two-shot everyone but the specials and the heavy guys.

[Kroniker81]

In an RPG player skill determines only if you can fully utlize the characters potential. If there is close to zero potential then there is not much you can utilize. In an RPG it's more about the character not so much about the player.

This is the big difference to Shooters where the player is simply the character in a parallel dimension so to speak. Or in a movie. It's about the player less about the character.

[Random 90]

What I find is strange about this system is that it's all one big contradiction. According to the codex the Geth learned that the more rounds you can shoot, the more likely you will win. So they learned that they can win by spamming rounds so they made a system that limits your ability to spam rounds. This system, which was designed make each shot count, was an improvement over the old overheating system because in old system "combatants were forced to deliberately shoot slower to manage waste or pause as their weapons vented."



So weapon manufacturers are willing to abandon a system that allowed a team of 3 people to kill hundreds if not thousands of Geth in order to copy the Geth army which is losing. This is like in if in Star Wars the rebels decided to copy stormtrooper armor and training because everyone knows how effective they are.

[Temper_Graniteskul]

Random 90 wrote...

What I find is strange about this system is that it's all one big contradiction. According to the codex the Geth learned that the more rounds you can shoot, the more likely you will win. So they learned that they can win by spamming rounds so they made a system that limits your ability to spam rounds. This system, which was designed make each shot count, was an improvement over the old overheating system because in old system "combatants were forced to deliberately shoot slower to manage waste or pause as their weapons vented."

So weapon manufacturers are willing to abandon a system that allowed a team of 3 people to kill hundreds if not thousands of Geth in order to copy the Geth army which is losing. This is like in if in Star Wars the rebels decided to copy stormtrooper armor and training because everyone knows how effective they are.

Honestly, I just work from an assumption that the synthetic Geth are able to personally manufacture as many thermal clips as they need from locally available inorganic materials - an advantage not available to organics. Manufacturers thought if the Geth were doing it, it must be advanced, so implemented anyway. It's a little story I tell myself.

Modifié par Temper_Graniteskul, 11 février 2010 - 11:49 .

[Random 90]

Temper_Graniteskul wrote...

Random 90 wrote...

What I find is strange about this system is that it's all one big contradiction. According to the codex the Geth learned that the more rounds you can shoot, the more likely you will win. So they learned that they can win by spamming rounds so they made a system that limits your ability to spam rounds. This system, which was designed make each shot count, was an improvement over the old overheating system because in old system "combatants were forced to deliberately shoot slower to manage waste or pause as their weapons vented."

So weapon manufacturers are willing to abandon a system that allowed a team of 3 people to kill hundreds if not thousands of Geth in order to copy the Geth army which is losing. This is like in if in Star Wars the rebels decided to copy stormtrooper armor and training because everyone knows how effective they are.

Honestly, I just work from an assumption that the synthetic Geth are able to personally manufacture as many thermal clips as they need from locally available inorganic materials - an advantage not available to organics. Manufacturers thought if the Geth were doing it, it must be advanced, so implemented anyway. It's a little story I tell myself.

That may work fine with the Geth but every gun you see in the game functions exactly the same way. Stangely enough, even old guns that were made before the Geth invented this system use thermal clips.

[EvilChani]

Temper_Graniteskul wrote...

Honestly, I just work from an assumption that the synthetic Geth are able to personally manufacture as many thermal clips as they need from locally available inorganic materials - an advantage not available to organics. Manufacturers thought if the Geth were doing it, it must be advanced, so implemented anyway. It's a little story I tell myself.

Perhaps it would annoy me less if I looked at it this way. It seems like something that would happen IRL. Some company gets a bright idea - "Let's upgrade our weapons to match those Geth people!!" - only to find out later that the Geth crap thermal clips and are now laughing their metal asses off at the fact that humans are now creating weapons that will ensure the Geth can stomp them in the ground. In the meantime, the manufacturers don't want to admit they screwed up and put everything back on the consumer:  "It's not our fault you can't crap thermal clips like the Geth do! Maybe if you weren't so stupid, you could figure out how to do it, too..."

Of course, then I'd want a scene in the game where Shepard hunts down said manufacturer and bashes some heads with the butt of her rifle...

[Evil_Weasel]

LoweGear wrote...

Considering that the core mechanics for shooting and aiming weapons in ME2 is largely similar to ME1's, I'm having a hard time believing that. You still needed to be able to train your weapon on the target to be able to to hit them in ME1, which is no different from ME2. In fact, weapons are easier to aim in ME2, since you no longer need to assume a certain stance just to get maximum accuracy, and the wobble on some weapons have decreased significantly, like with Sniper Rifles.

I may have said that I also found ME1's normal difficulty easier than ME2's, but only because of the infinite ammo system.

Not true, my pistole sites dont close all the way until I am behind cover, which I would call "a certin stance."

As for training your wepon, ME1 had auto aim built in, infact how much auto aim was an option in the settings, default was set to the medium setting. I can say with out a doubt that I only had to get my sites of my pistol near my target in ME1, not directly and precicely onto my target.

I played as an infeltrator as my main character, if I waited 3 seconds for the initial sway to go away, I could fire 18 shots out of my sniper rifle with perfect unwavering accuracey at the end of my first playthrough before the sites started to sway agin, and could not over heat my sniper rifle.

I ask this, if my gun could kill the same Krogens I am fighting now 2 years ago how come I cant have a version of the old tech guns as a backup (you know the overheating ones with lots of shots) so I at least have a leathel option, maby less leatal than the new guns but better than the potentiality of running out of ammo, or punching a krogen to death.....oh wait retcon, forgot about that, nvm.

Modifié par Evil_Weasel, 12 février 2010 - 04:31 .

[Dethateer]

EvilChani wrote...

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

Dethateer wrote...

Which was a huge problem in the beginning, because snipers, for example wobbled around, and you had to wait for the perfect moment to press the trigger, which requires faster reflexes than this. Incidentally, I usually failed at that. My reflexes suck.

I have to agree with you about the Sniper Rifle, but then again it didn't require a 'baby and bathwater' approach to it either.

I don't understand the problem with the sniper rifle in ME1. In the beginning, when you had no skill using it, it made sense for it to wobble around. Once you get points in the skill, it got much easier. By the end, when I had maxed the ability, I could use the sniper rifle not just to snipe - easily and accurately - but I used it as a close range weapon and shot my enemies in the face, to their demise. That, really, is one reason I have complained about the combat in ME2. In ME1, Shep's shooting abilities were largely on her (or him); in ME2, it's all about the player. I prefer the former to the latter and, since this is supposed to be a RPG, then the playable character's abilities should definitely depend more on her/his skill rather than the player's abilities with a controller or keyboard.

You DO realize Shep was an elite soldier trained in the use of every single weapon, right? There is no excuse for him being unable to hit the broad side of a barn.
And that's exactly the point, as an infiltrator, for example, for at least 10 levels you couldn't hit a damned thing with the rifle.

Modifié par Dethateer, 12 février 2010 - 07:49 .

[Doright36]

More realistic? Yes. More intense yes..



But going on a combat mission with only 18 shots in your pistol with the idea that you will likely pick up more on the ground during the firefight is just something I find very off putting.





It really comes down to that to me. Limited ammo is fine but some weapons it is just waaayyy too limited. Even considering that heat sinks are easily found on the battle field. I just makes no sense that an adept who is a seasoned alliance combat veteran would choose to leave the ship with only 18 rounds available in their primary weapon.

[Sibbwolf]

Random 90 wrote...

What I find is strange about this system is that it's all one big contradiction.

I think the stance was taken from reality considerations, rather than how it was implemented in ME1 (see the various people pointing to the actual laws of physics).

According to the codex the Geth learned that the more rounds you can shoot, the more likely you will win. So they learned that they can win by spamming rounds so they made a system that limits your ability to spam rounds.

Again, from a realistic standpoint, the ME2 system would be much faster than the ME1 system. It is a weakness as far as the game goes, but a lot of people, myself included, believe the ME2 system to be much mroe fun than ME1.

I know people complain they have to run around and scrounge, I'm assuming they don't check the battlefield for hidden datapads and things.

So weapon manufacturers are willing to abandon a system that allowed a team of 3 people to kill hundreds if not thousands of Geth in order to copy the Geth army which is losing. This is like in if in Star Wars the rebels decided to copy stormtrooper armor and training because everyone knows how effective they are.

Not really, going again from a realistic point of view, the 'Geth' had one major advantage in firepower, but a huge disadvantage in manpower (which would be more important when the geth are massively outnumbered?).

The codex in the game is to offer an in-game explanation as to why the game was made, without breaking immersion. The real reason is that the ME1 system was 'broken' - Overpowered, implausible and easy to 'fix' to make even more overpowered and implausible. The new system, while far from perfect (*cough* universal design, squadmates and enemies still seem to have unltd ammo.. *cough*), is a massive improvement in terms of immersion (if you really think marines etc don't scrounge for ammo, read up on the "Black Hawk Down"), and balance.

[Doright36]

Sibbwolf wrote...

Random 90 wrote...

What I find is strange about this system is that it's all one big contradiction.

I think the stance was taken from reality considerations, rather than how it was implemented in ME1 (see the various people pointing to the actual laws of physics).

According to the codex the Geth learned that the more rounds you can shoot, the more likely you will win. So they learned that they can win by spamming rounds so they made a system that limits your ability to spam rounds.

Again, from a realistic standpoint, the ME2 system would be much faster than the ME1 system. It is a weakness as far as the game goes, but a lot of people, myself included, believe the ME2 system to be much mroe fun than ME1.

I know people complain they have to run around and scrounge, I'm assuming they don't check the battlefield for hidden datapads and things.

So weapon manufacturers are willing to abandon a system that allowed a team of 3 people to kill hundreds if not thousands of Geth in order to copy the Geth army which is losing. This is like in if in Star Wars the rebels decided to copy stormtrooper armor and training because everyone knows how effective they are.

Not really, going again from a realistic point of view, the 'Geth' had one major advantage in firepower, but a huge disadvantage in manpower (which would be more important when the geth are massively outnumbered?).

The codex in the game is to offer an in-game explanation as to why the game was made, without breaking immersion. The real reason is that the ME1 system was 'broken' - Overpowered, implausible and easy to 'fix' to make even more overpowered and implausible. The new system, while far from perfect (*cough* universal design, squadmates and enemies still seem to have unltd ammo.. *cough*), is a massive improvement in terms of immersion (if you really think marines etc don't scrounge for ammo, read up on the "Black Hawk Down"), and balance.

Sure they do in prolong firefights. But they don't go into the field initally with only 18 spare rounds for their primary weapon either.

[Sibbwolf]

There is a reason the handcannon has a small pool. I think it should have larger, yes, but there is a reason.

That reason is it's an accurate, high powered pistol. Not a spray and pray weapon. While there are fights the player would, if using only the handcannon and no powers, need more ammo, using tactical combinations would get around the ammo situation easily.

But go to another thread, and there's a person who wants to use nothing but powers and his sniper rifle (which he or she uses at anything other than extremely close range, and I can only assume s/he uses it on all targets). Is that a valid reason for giving the SR a larger pool, or is that poor tactics?

Modifié par Sibbwolf, 12 février 2010 - 08:53 .

[Jebel Krong]

better and more realistic?



er - no.



1. this is a sci fi game and the codex for weapons was established in the first game.

2. enemies/allies have unlimited ammo still - this affects only the player.

3. what soldier only brings 13 shots with him (sniper) or 24 (pistol)?

4. random ammo drops are now needed after firefights and in levels, some of which don't fit (apartments?).

5. if you are going down the "more realistic" route then - why, as a fully trained soldier, can you then not use all the weapons in the game as every class?



putting arbitrary limits on player actions is not good game design. being clevel with level design, enemy ai, enemy locations, numbers, type etc. is - that's how you make the game challenging and firefights have tension, not stupid gimmicks like an arbitrary "ammo" system.

[IggyD]

so you like the limited ammo? it makes the game fun for you? great. fantastic. I don't want to take that away from you.

The thing is, i don't really like it. It doesn't make the game more fun for me, just more frustrating. What i would really like is the option to turn that feature on or off, or make it partially familiar with regenerating ammo.

As for the opening argument the limitless ammo block in ME1 was self condratictory...well, you're absolutely right. thing is, it was an acceptable break from reality in the sense that technically, you only fired several hundred shots in a single mission rather than the 10000 or so pellets the block could generate, and that nothing said that you couldn't replace the block when you got back on your ship.

But hey, you're right. the game needs to be more realistic. Hey, here's an idea, why don't we make the ammo system even MORE realistic by having you needing to replace the ammo block as well every 500 shots or so? and better yet, replace the battery every 50 shots? those mass effect fields and electric rails need a LOT of juice to propel those slugs! REALISM GALORE.

Modifié par IggyD, 12 février 2010 - 09:51 .

[Massadonious1]

I'm sorry that some people can't have a penatly system they can trivialize with broken game mechanics anymore.



NG+ is still avaliable in ME1 if you need your crutch.

[shumworld]

I love the new ammo system. It adds a danger of loosing my offense and forces me to strategies. I rarely run out of it (even in Hardcore mode) and when I do I have another gun ready to use.

[Sibbwolf]

IggyD, Jebel Krong, I get what you're saying, really. I suggest you actually read what's being said rather than jump, however.

[fLoki]

Didn't see this thread so made my own on combat system but basicly i think it should be more heat based. Ammo system is just out of place for me in ME and makes it look like CoD or any such game. Not really special and different.. Anyways i'd do it like this:

Better way to handle combat would be to make each clip be a fixed 100
degree capacity. Bullets would spend/add heat to it for example:
shotguns 15, heavy pistol 10, submachine 2,assault rifle 3, sniper 25,
plus variations to the numbers depending on the different models of
each found.
Clip should lose 1 degree heat per second which would
make cooldown about minute and a half so having clips would be valuable
because fights rarely last more then a few minutes.
If you remove
auto reload you can add a lock mechanic which would make firing
disabled, if you use entire clip with no reload, till you either reload clip or wait till full heat dissapation.
Instead of ammo upgrades you put in heat sink capacity increase in steps of 10%.

I think that would make more sense as an upgrade to combat system and
would make clips valuable instead of a hassle that makes combat feel generic and no auto reload would
add another dimension to firefights.

[Killian Kalthorne]

I don't want realism. I want consistency. ME2 fails in this.

[Evil_Weasel]

I dont get how people keep saying it is more "realistic" I understand the concept of a heat disapation system. Is it more realistic that if you play your PC/XBOX for 5 hours that you have to go over their and "eject" the heat sink from your PC/XBOX and put in a new one becouse they dont cool down on their own, at all, ever.

In that example of playing for 5 hours say thats the life of your gameing solution, and you play for 3 hours, well you have 2 hours left, now the question is you have a big night of gameing with your friends do you tacticly eject your heat sink now to get 5 hours of uninterupted play, or do you run the 2 hours left out and run the risk of haveing to insert a new heat sink in the middle of a big match? Well fortunatly you dont have to do that becous the system has a way to get rid of the waste heat......and in the distant future heat will be disapated at remakable speeds.

As for it being more fun.....thats your opinion. I dont like sports games, doesnt mean their not fun for people that like them. My friend doesnt like any game with platforming, doesnt mean I dont have fun playing Ratchet and Clank. Is it better? Its diffretnt, and that can be better or worse, but in this case it is just kind of a latteral shift, its just diffrent, and this particular diffrence some people happen to enjoy more than others.

Is it retcon, yes. That offends me and lots of other people that bothered to delve into the presented "science" of this games "fiction."

Bottem line, most everything you people are arguing about is just your opinion. Face it, better, more fun, more realistic, that is just what you think and this is the internet your not going to change someone ealses opinions by spewing yours as a hard fact.

Modifié par Evil_Weasel, 12 février 2010 - 03:50 .

[II JORDO II]

I agree, waiting for my shotgun overloading in the middle of a fight is not good. Or a sniper which overloads after two shots? An ammo system is very good imo.

[Jebel Krong]

Sibbwolf wrote...

IggyD, Jebel Krong, I get what you're saying, really. I suggest you actually read what's being said rather than jump, however.

I DID read it, and all the other threads on this issue. what i'm saying is that the merits of the me2 system are far outweighed by the drawbacks. a better system would have been to have something like me1 - lets's say an AR with 2 Scram Rail VIIs inside: you have a powerful gun, limitless ammo BUT is prone to overheating unless you manage your firing rate, allowing for a brief cooldown. not only is this just as "tension-filled" as the ammo mechanism but it gives you that extra thrill when you are about to redline, but you just manage to finish off a powerful enemy before you do.

i fervently maintain that better design choices - better enemy ai and numbers are better than ANY arbitrary limiting mechanisms.

[Sibbwolf]

Jebel, read the other thread on this topic, Akimb0 and I have some ideas for a hybrid system and input would be welcomed.

Evil_Weasel wrote...

I dont get how people keep saying it is more "realistic" I understand the concept of a heat disapation system. Is it more realistic that if you play your PC/XBOX for 5 hours that you have to go over their and "eject" the heat sink from your PC/XBOX and put in a new one becouse they dont cool down on their own, at all, ever.

There is a point the "realism" argument falls down. However, your PC/Xbox is cooled by pushing cooler fluid (usually air or water) over a heat sink to remove most of the heat to allow the heat sink to operate. This system simply does not work if the fluid is slow moving, too warm already, does not exist or if the fan fails.

This is why some of us are talking about having a hybrid system. BW moving to 'ammo' was a good start, but they went too far, as far as some of us are concerned. It would combine the heat dissapation system of ME1, with the faster rate of fire and increased 'tactical thinking' ME2 was wanted to provide.

Modifié par Sibbwolf, 12 février 2010 - 04:17 .

[Fhaileas]

Having engaged in said discussion many a time, one thing I never comprehend are people who decry the "realism" of the previous system (compared to the current one) "in the context" of the "mass effect universe". Really mind-boggling!