525 réponses à ce sujet

[TornadoADV]

Basically ME2 can do no wrong, eh?

[Soruyao]

lukandroll wrote...
Basic Role playing for ya:
Its about role playing the CHARACTER, NOT yourself....
In Me1 you can choose how your character aiming and training will be according to his talents, in ME2
you ARE aiming with YOUR skills not the characters's...
Its a simply concept, but very important in role playing games

In ME1 you were aiming with your skills as a player, you just had to be even better at aiming to make up for the fact that your character couldn't hold his gun straight.

In order to aim with ONLY your character skills, you have to use something like VATS, or else you are aiming for your character.

(Even then, it's YOUR skill in knowing what to aim at and not your character's that's influencing what you target.)

Divorcing player skill from player skill is completely impossible unless there is no player input on combat whatsoever.

[Temper_Graniteskul]

EtherD wrote...

I could not help myself but I find it a bit funny how the OP complains bout the ammo issue. Which opens up to the simple fact and statement of... how about you just "don't suck". I love the limited ammo as it creates that nice feel of making every shot count. If your running out of ammo, try aiming better. Even without such sarcasm I'm serious, just get better at the FPS portion and you'll rarely run out of ammo. Even on insanity I'm not starving for ammo.

No. Not 'No, I won't try,' but 'No, it's just not going to happen.' Improvement in this area, for a number of reasons, just isn't going to happen for me, and I doubt I'm completely alone. Practicing to get better would (and has, in other games) lead to exactly one thing: me, frustrated and angry at having wasted hours on trying to 'improve' and yet ending with my character dead on the floor just as often as before I started. There's a reason I don't play shooters, and that's because I play games to have fun, not to go to a job of grinding practice to try to improve a skill that just won't.

ME1 was forgiving enough that it wasn't as relevant - limits based on an overheated weapon rather than ammo, some less aggressive AI, and lack of 'infinite spawning enemies' made for accessible combat for those of us that can't hit the broad side of a barn; hell, I managed it on Normal difficulty, with a couple of combats that required retries. That's my largest issue with the change. I could play the first game through, and I had reasonable expectation because of that that I would be able to play through the second and third installments when they came out. There's usually not quite as large an upheaval with the combat engine, or at least that's not been my experience. However, the changes Bioware made have converged to make it damned difficult for me to play, even on Casual, and telling me to 'aim better' or 'don't suck' isn't helping because those are not options on the table.

I am extraordinarily tired of people suggesting that the solution to the complaints over combat is 'just get better,' or measuring the complaints of others against their own skill level as if it were something everyone can achieve. 'I'm not having problems' is not an answer for those of us who are. Player skill improvement is not always an option, nor should it have to be for a game where player skill was not the deciding factor to combat victory in the first game of a trilogy. I wish Bioware had made it a damned GoW or CoD shooter combat engine in the first game - I would have put it down, and had no expectations of being able to play the other titles in the series. But they didn't, so yeah, you're going to get people complaining.

[Ke11iente]

I don't feel nearly as drawn in as I did with ME1. I like the greater amount of character interaction, but couldn't they have integrated that into an amazing plot instead of MAKING it the plot? My whine list, in no partic order:

1. It feels more restrictive, like there's literally less space to explore. It may actually be the same amount of space, but by restricting my choices & movement, it feels smaller and less immersive. It keeps reminding me that it's a video game.
2. No random chatting with companions while on missions. Their mission dialog has gone up, but I'd still like to be able to randomly talk to them.
3. Weapon & Armor upgrades, or the lack thereof. The research system is boring and restrictive. Part of the fun was coming up with crazy weapon customizations like a super damage heat bomb or slow firing cryo-pistol. They just needed to fix the inventory screen, not take out all the mods.
4. The ammo system. Takes away from the science. I thought the concept of shaving slugs off blocks of metal from ME1 was brilliant and unique. Though the "ammo" in ME2 is actually heat sinks, not slugs, that's just semantics.
5. You can't sell anything. What am I supposed to do with all this excess palladium?
6. Helmet toggle and planet scanning (beating dead horses)
7. The Shepard Shuffle!! Why was Shep's dancing SO much better in ME1??
8. You can't heal your teammates, just bring them back to life after they croak.
9. For that matter, you can't heal yourself.
10. Graphics glitches. I can't tell you how many times I've been able to see through someone's head while they're talking, or a line gets delivered by the invisible man/woman, or sometimes they'll show Grunt talking with Garrus' voice, etc.
11.Half the time, the background NPC's mouths don't move when they're talking to each other. It's just weird.
12. The fuel system is silly. It's just a headache that doesn't add anything to the game. And it's not any more "realistic" because we're not searching for suitable planets on which to discharge our core.

The good points:
1. Customizing the captain's cabin. Love my space hamster. (Tweh!)
2. More and better romance opportunities & more opportunities for dialog with your companions.
3. More face customization AND being able to import but tweak the face of my ME1 Shep.
4. More Joker dialog.
5. Choice of casual outfits and armor customization (if you ignore the helmet thing).
6. Fewer elevator rides. Although I'd take them back in a heartbeat if it meant more freedom to explore
7. Heavy Weapons. Love dropping tiny nukes on mechs.
8. Mordin. This character is brilliant.
10. Better enemy AI
11. Fewer typos (they were rampant in ME1).

For all its faults, the old game had a much better story and REALLY drew me into the ME world. When you get down to it, ME2's only improvement over ME1 is more interaction with the companions and slightly better enemy AI.The rest of what improved from ME1 is small potatoes compared to what it lost in terms of gaming experience. I wouldn't say it's a "huge disappointment" though. It's still a very good game. It was just hard for it to live up to ME1.

Modifié par Ke11iente, 25 février 2010 - 12:07 .

[Jaysonie]

haberman13 wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...

Carmarkcaine wrote...

You are absolutly correct. The problem is, and I've mentioned this before, that most player that are left in forums are consol players and they are SOOO easy to satisfie compared to pc players. I think most critics have left the forum, only fanboys are left, and for them the game is PERFECT, which really tells alot about them and there game style, but I guess that's why they bought a consol and not a real computer.

And as for the fact you dindt buy the game, thumbs up for that. I wsih I didnt have either.

The core audience was and always has been for console gamers. Get over yourself, pc gaming is no better than console gaming.

Yes, this game was made for consoles.

but ... FALSE: PC gaming is superior to console gaming for a number of reasons, which we don't need to detail because we all know the arguments.

The one bonus to console gaming is the "couch" argument, which doesn't really apply anymore anyway.

I think i should correct myself. Pc gamers are no better than Console gamers.

[addiction21]

TornadoADV wrote...

Basically ME2 can do no wrong, eh?

There are not waffles in it. I consider that a big wrong...   theres some others  also/

[Gnaeus.Silvanus]

Honestly never played the first ME and I just dived in to ME2. I had a blast with ME2 but it was short-lived so I went and bought ME and although there was still hangover with ME2, ME for me is outstanding in content and story, although combat is problematic sometimes because squad members tend to shoot through walls and not actively seeking the shooter overall its really much better than ME2. I would love to see the original gameplay of ME coupled with the simplicity on ME2 in ME3.

[Jaysonie]

Carmarkcaine wrote...

Jaysonie wrote...

Carmarkcaine wrote...

You are absolutly correct. The problem is, and I've mentioned this before, that most player that are left in forums are consol players and they are SOOO easy to satisfie compared to pc players. I think most critics have left the forum, only fanboys are left, and for them the game is PERFECT, which really tells alot about them and there game style, but I guess that's why they bought a consol and not a real computer.

And as for the fact you dindt buy the game, thumbs up for that. I wsih I didnt have either.

The core audience was and always has been for console gamers. Get over yourself, pc gaming is no better than console gaming.

You should try and buy a PC and get some of the old games, before consols was an issue.

I have quite a few old games for the pc, i dont seem to enjoy many of them.

[Canez fan 1988]

ME2 is clearly superior to ME1 in every single aspect. That doesn't mean ME2 is perfect, it just means it's better than ME1.

[jbadm04]

Ke11iente wrote...

8. You can't heal your teammates, just bring them back to life after they croak.
9. For that matter, you can't heal yourself.

8. wrong

and

9. wrong

[Sputax]

Ive just started the game bt i think its worth my 2 pennies worth.



Great story, but very poor gameplay. Too simplistic character development (doubt there will be the long discussions about how to develop characters like i found in me2). 4 skill areas, 2 weapons with a few addons. Me1 was already simpler than other rpgs (like FO3, a truely epic game), just dont understand why?



Combat is boring now. Thinking back to the variety of powers, recharge times, large area over which combat took place, me1 was much better. The few times i ran out firing i got killed by biotics or heavy weapons. There was much more intelligent use of the environment including hiding behind object to heal and using powers effectively.



Now you sit behind cover, launch 1 or 2 powers every few seconds and fire away till the ammo runs out (which is every firefight). No management of health and shields. no variety or thought needed. They seem to have taken it out of gears of war which was so simple i stopped playing after half an our and cant even find the disks.



The mini games give a clear indication of the aims of mass effect 2. Simple to the point ive yet to fail one first time. even if i do i get 3 attempts. i frequently failed mini games in mass effect 1 which made them a challenge.



That for me makes it clear the game is designed for early teen console users. Just not what i had expected :-(

[haberman13]

Sputax wrote...

Ive just started the game bt i think its worth my 2 pennies worth.

Great story, but very poor gameplay. Too simplistic character development (doubt there will be the long discussions about how to develop characters like i found in me2). 4 skill areas, 2 weapons with a few addons. Me1 was already simpler than other rpgs (like FO3, a truely epic game), just dont understand why?

Combat is boring now. Thinking back to the variety of powers, recharge times, large area over which combat took place, me1 was much better. The few times i ran out firing i got killed by biotics or heavy weapons. There was much more intelligent use of the environment including hiding behind object to heal and using powers effectively.

Now you sit behind cover, launch 1 or 2 powers every few seconds and fire away till the ammo runs out (which is every firefight). No management of health and shields. no variety or thought needed. They seem to have taken it out of gears of war which was so simple i stopped playing after half an our and cant even find the disks.

The mini games give a clear indication of the aims of mass effect 2. Simple to the point ive yet to fail one first time. even if i do i get 3 attempts. i frequently failed mini games in mass effect 1 which made them a challenge.

That for me makes it clear the game is designed for early teen console users. Just not what i had expected :-(

That pretty much sums it up for me... but Bioware wins either way, I'll buy ME3 even if its just like ME2.

ME1 is in my top 5 list, ME2 doesn't even make the top 20 because of the reasons you've stated.

[Jaysonie]

Sputax wrote...

Ive just started the game bt i think its worth my 2 pennies worth.

Great story, but very poor gameplay. Too simplistic character development (doubt there will be the long discussions about how to develop characters like i found in me2). 4 skill areas, 2 weapons with a few addons. Me1 was already simpler than other rpgs (like FO3, a truely epic game), just dont understand why?

Combat is boring now. Thinking back to the variety of powers, recharge times, large area over which combat took place, me1 was much better. The few times i ran out firing i got killed by biotics or heavy weapons. There was much more intelligent use of the environment including hiding behind object to heal and using powers effectively.

Now you sit behind cover, launch 1 or 2 powers every few seconds and fire away till the ammo runs out (which is every firefight). No management of health and shields. no variety or thought needed. They seem to have taken it out of gears of war which was so simple i stopped playing after half an our and cant even find the disks.

The mini games give a clear indication of the aims of mass effect 2. Simple to the point ive yet to fail one first time. even if i do i get 3 attempts. i frequently failed mini games in mass effect 1 which made them a challenge.

That for me makes it clear the game is designed for early teen console users. Just not what i had expected :-(

What difficulty are you playing on? I suggest you bump it up abit if you think its this mindless.

[Jaysonie]

double post

Modifié par Jaysonie, 25 février 2010 - 01:07 .

[FlurryJK2]

Oh this thread again

[SithLordExarKun]

yoomazir wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

[ Wow getting butthurt over an opinion that differs from yours huh?

seems you' ve got experience about it am I right? how much do you fare for it?

Yep, i would then conclude you are a professional at getting butt hurt when some one disagrees with you.

[finnithe]

Temper_Graniteskul wrote...

EtherD wrote...

I could not help myself but I find it a bit funny how the OP complains bout the ammo issue. Which opens up to the simple fact and statement of... how about you just "don't suck". I love the limited ammo as it creates that nice feel of making every shot count. If your running out of ammo, try aiming better. Even without such sarcasm I'm serious, just get better at the FPS portion and you'll rarely run out of ammo. Even on insanity I'm not starving for ammo.

No. Not 'No, I won't try,' but 'No, it's just not going to happen.' Improvement in this area, for a number of reasons, just isn't going to happen for me, and I doubt I'm completely alone. Practicing to get better would (and has, in other games) lead to exactly one thing: me, frustrated and angry at having wasted hours on trying to 'improve' and yet ending with my character dead on the floor just as often as before I started. There's a reason I don't play shooters, and that's because I play games to have fun, not to go to a job of grinding practice to try to improve a skill that just won't.

ME1 was forgiving enough that it wasn't as relevant - limits based on an overheated weapon rather than ammo, some less aggressive AI, and lack of 'infinite spawning enemies' made for accessible combat for those of us that can't hit the broad side of a barn; hell, I managed it on Normal difficulty, with a couple of combats that required retries. That's my largest issue with the change. I could play the first game through, and I had reasonable expectation because of that that I would be able to play through the second and third installments when they came out. There's usually not quite as large an upheaval with the combat engine, or at least that's not been my experience. However, the changes Bioware made have converged to make it damned difficult for me to play, even on Casual, and telling me to 'aim better' or 'don't suck' isn't helping because those are not options on the table.

I am extraordinarily tired of people suggesting that the solution to the complaints over combat is 'just get better,' or measuring the complaints of others against their own skill level as if it were something everyone can achieve. 'I'm not having problems' is not an answer for those of us who are. Player skill improvement is not always an option, nor should it have to be for a game where player skill was not the deciding factor to combat victory in the first game of a trilogy. I wish Bioware had made it a damned GoW or CoD shooter combat engine in the first game - I would have put it down, and had no expectations of being able to play the other titles in the series. But they didn't, so yeah, you're going to get people complaining.

Bioware from the beginning has said that they wanted Mass Effect a shooter. I don't think it's reasonable to complain about a game because changes made to it made it difficult for you, especially since I haven't read about complaints about difficulty on the forums. Expecting Bioware to reverse the changes that they decided to make because you're finding it too difficult to adapt just seems unreasonable.

Are you playing the PC version by any chance? I know that you can edit the Coalesced.ini files to modify your health and (mostly) eliminate the ammo system.

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

"Huge" is kind of exaggerating it a bit imo.

In fact it wasn't a dissapointment at all, i like the second game more then the first.

<3 ME

[TJSolo]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

yoomazir wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

[ Wow getting butthurt over an opinion that differs from yours huh?

seems you' ve got experience about it am I right? how much do you fare for it?

Yep, i would then conclude you are a professional at getting butt hurt when some one disagrees with you.

All of your one-liners seem to show you're the one mixing feelings and getting hurt over someones opinions.

[SithLordExarKun]

TJSolo wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

yoomazir wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

[ Wow getting butthurt over an opinion that differs from yours huh?

seems you' ve got experience about it am I right? how much do you fare for it?

Yep, i would then conclude you are a professional at getting butt hurt when some one disagrees with you.

All of your one-liners seem to show you're the one mixing feelings and getting hurt over someones opinions.

Says the one replying with one liners. How ironic.

[TJSolo]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

yoomazir wrote...

SithLordExarKun wrote...

[ Wow getting butthurt over an opinion that differs from yours huh?

seems you' ve got experience about it am I right? how much do you fare for it?

Yep, i would then conclude you are a professional at getting butt hurt when some one disagrees with you.

All of your one-liners seem to show you're the one mixing feelings and getting hurt over someones opinions.

Says the one replying with one liners. How ironic.

There you go again, go go go go.
None of your contributions to threads that have opinions you don't agree with have been anything but attacks on the OP and posters with on inteligible argument to support.
You're just trolling to get threads locked.

[SithLordExarKun]

TJSolo wrote...


There you go again, go go go go.
None of your contributions to threads that have opinions you don't agree with have been anything but attacks on th
OP and posters with on inteligible argument to support.

   Why do i need to waste my time when more than half the posters in this thread already tore his criticisms apart and gave their own opinion as to why they disagree with him?

In fact why are you specifically targetting me? In fact you, attacked me prior to my previous response so why are you trying to tell me that i have been doing nothing but bashing people when you yourself can't practise what you constantly preach?

You are a ridiculous hypocrite that thinks he can police the forums and dictate what people can or cannot do.

The reason why i "attacked" that social reject yoomazir was him bashing people that liked the game and when their opinions differed from his. I did nothing wrong but point that out, how does this count as trolling? 
And then you accuse me of doing absolutely nothing but troll in every single thread without any proof at all, what a sad and pathetic hypocrite.

TJSolo wrote...
You're just trolling to get threads locked.

Let me use your own  words against you : prove it.

[JMorris85]

i completely agree with the OP, ME2 was a huge disappointment.the only improvement made between ME1 & 2 is the combat & the ship customization. and thats it, every other change made between the 2 games was for the worse. to even call ME2 an rpg (or even a Mass Effect game for the matter) is a huge stretch. ME2 is an rpg in as much as Modern Warfare multiplayer is an rpg. so....yea, thats my opinion, and if ME3 dosent go back to its ME1 roots, i wont be buying it.

*edit* i would like to add that im a huge bioware fan & still own every bioware game made on the xbox. i would also add that this is the first (& probably the last) time i post on a dev's forum, ME2 was simply such a huge disapointment i felt compelled to sign up & say so.

Modifié par JMorris85, 25 février 2010 - 07:06 .

[TJSolo]

SithLordExarKun wrote...
The reason why i "attacked" that social reject yoomazir was him bashing people that liked the game and when their opinions differed from his. I did nothing wrong but point that out, how does this count as trolling? 
And then you accuse me of doing absolutely nothing but troll in every single thread without any proof at all, what a sad and pathetic hypocrite.

Apparently you don't read because Yoomazir started in the thread just stating his dismay with what ME2 lacked and corrected some people misconceptions that sales = quality. When in fact ME2 is a sequel with a pre-established customer base and there were heavy preorder incentives which served as the biggest factors of the games initial sales.

Yoomazir was debating point for point, he was not attacking people that like the game(in fact he likes the game) he was making points of what he didn't like about ME2.
Yoomazir was not rude or insulting until others started to personally attack him instead of countering his points.

Since you didn't agree with him, instead of looking at the validity of his points or trying to counter him. You went directly to attacks on the person instead of points. You're still doing it. I don't logically see how having some negative opinions on ME2 makes someone a social reject but that is your logical fallacy it is not for me to understand why you need fallacies to make a point.

Modifié par TJSolo, 25 février 2010 - 07:34 .

[SurfaceBeneath]

>This thread