71 réponses à ce sujet

[Big_Stupid_Jelly]

Merlanni wrote...

Make it a RPG with shooter elements. Think PC while developing, do not try to please so many console gamers as possible.

Less recruiting of NPC's you do not use. More what weapon does Shepard wants to wield, not forced upon you by class.

I can go on and on but once you have played the old game Planescape Torment you see how a game can keep you weeks behinds the screen with little fighting. Not everything that moves need to die.

It does not matter how hard the fanboys cry, mass effect2 is good, but not worthy enough to be called great.

ME1 did actually come out on Xbox360 first, and not all console people are shooter happy i'll also add.

[brgillespie]

No inventory system, thanks.



As for weapon modifications... we basically have that already in ME2. +50%base damage, more shield/armor/barrier damage depending on the weapon, more ammunition for certain weapons, etc.



I'm still curious to see what they end up with in ME3.

[Big_Stupid_Jelly]

Limited Inventory system, more streamlined version of ME1, similar to layout of Dragon Age,
Actual armour for squad..note no evening clothes, allow such armour to be customised, or replaced.

Ability to buy weapons/armour at stores, or at other facilities such as c-sec etc.

No loyalty missions, period.

Modifié par Big_Stupid_Jelly, 27 février 2010 - 11:10 .

[MPaBkaTa123]

Merlanni wrote...

Make it a RPG with shooter elements. Think PC while developing, do not try to please so many console gamers as possible.

Less recruiting of NPC's you do not use. More what weapon does Shepard wants to wield, not forced upon you by class.

I can go on and on but once you have played the old game Planescape Torment you see how a game can keep you weeks behinds the screen with little fighting. Not everything that moves need to die.

It does not matter how hard the fanboys cry, mass effect2 is good, but not worthy enough to be called great.

The bolded part is the moment you lost all credibility. Seriously Planescape Torment was awesome but games move on and so do series. And forcing  your opinions as fact annoys me and quite a few people but whatever. Italics is in almost every RPG ever made. Seriously Mass Effect, Kotor, Dragon Age all of them limit you depending on your class so complaining about it now is just freaking stupid.
P.S: Thanks for telling everyone about the rachni missions never found it when i played the game will have to see it again on my infiltrator @ TJ

[MPaBkaTa123]

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

Limited Inventory system, more streamlined version of ME1, similar to layout of Dragon Age,
Actual armour for squad..note no evening clothes, allow such armour to be customised, or replaced.

Ability to buy weapons/armour at stores, or at other facilities such as c-sec etc.

No loyalty missions, period.

This sums it up i think:
WTF?
Seriously loyalty missions revelaed and added a lot of depth to all characters nearly all of them were very fun and a break from the norm and all the choices and outcomes in some are interesting . Also as said before most RPGs have about 5 or 6 weapons since there is not really much difference besides damage and minor bonuses.

Modifié par MPaBkaTa123, 27 février 2010 - 11:14 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Well I could play along even though I was trying to compare apple to apples by just looking at the Citadel missions.

You can't just compare missions on the Citadel in ME1 to those on the Citadel in ME2, seeing as there are 3 hub worlds in ME2 as opposed to just one in ME1.

Compare the Citadel Missions to those small missions on Omega/Illium and Citadel in ME2. Let's see which are better.

As for N7 missions in ME2. There is also a great deal of storyline. For example you get see the inner working of the three mercenary companies Or take down a faulty Mech Factory. They aren't just one quest missions, rather they take place over 2-3 missions

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 27 février 2010 - 11:14 .

[Big_Stupid_Jelly]

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

Limited Inventory system, more streamlined version of ME1, similar to layout of Dragon Age,
Actual armour for squad..note no evening clothes, allow such armour to be customised, or replaced.

Ability to buy weapons/armour at stores, or at other facilities such as c-sec etc.

No loyalty missions, period.

This sums it up i think:
WTF?

Well..somehow we got through ME1 quite dandy without them, i'm not sure how we managed it but we did.

Seriously, I'd question their loyalty to the cause, if they weren't up for saving every single advanced lifeform from the Reapers. Basically if they weren't I'd push them aside myself.

[MPaBkaTa123]

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

Limited Inventory system, more streamlined version of ME1, similar to layout of Dragon Age,
Actual armour for squad..note no evening clothes, allow such armour to be customised, or replaced.

Ability to buy weapons/armour at stores, or at other facilities such as c-sec etc.

No loyalty missions, period.

This sums it up i think:
WTF?

Well..somehow we got through ME1 quite dandy without them, i'm not sure how we managed it but we did.

Seriously, I'd question their loyalty to the cause, if they weren't up for saving every single advanced lifeform from the Reapers. Basically if they weren't I'd push them aside myself.

This requires caps me think:
ME1 IS NOT THE FREAKING PINNACLE OF GAMES! Seriously, are you just going to ignore improvements because they were not in the original.I understand weapons,i understand inventory all these are just preferences and i have a problem with them myself but this is just stupid. This is the final thing they want to do for some npcs their purpose in life if they do not complete they will have doubts and regrets that hinder them as well as having ulterior motives.

[Big_Stupid_Jelly]

So what? So they have personal issues, those colonists have personal issues - namely their impending death.



Its a good job the allies in WW2 didn't have personal issues because their CO would have to go do their loyalty mission first otherwise D-Day wouldnt have happened.

[MPaBkaTa123]

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

So what? So they have personal issues, those colonists have personal issues - namely their impending death.

Its a good job the allies in WW2 didn't have personal issues because their CO would have to go do their loyalty mission first otherwise D-Day wouldnt have happened.

Really?That's the best you can do? By that logic why do we have to get shepard skills in the original game in order to make him shoot accurately. Should'nt a veteran soldier be able to shoot people in the head without accidentally hitting the wall behind them?

[Big_Stupid_Jelly]

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

Big_Stupid_Jelly wrote...

So what? So they have personal issues, those colonists have personal issues - namely their impending death.

Its a good job the allies in WW2 didn't have personal issues because their CO would have to go do their loyalty mission first otherwise D-Day wouldnt have happened.

Really?That's the best you can do? By that logic why do we have to get shepard skills in the original game in order to make him shoot accurately. Should'nt a veteran soldier be able to shoot people in the head without accidentally hitting the wall behind them?

There's a huge difference between the two. The skills aspect is because its an RPG, not...say, COD.

The 2nd is basically the entire story of ME2, and as such should hold water, yet it doesn't.

Anwyay, it wouldn't have been so bad if they had been optional, but they weren't. I'd have loved to have said to Miranda or Jacob, 'Focus on the objective, people are depending on us' and if they didn't like it, drop them at the nearest settlement.

[Andaius20]

you do have the option of not doing any of the loyalty missions though.....

[Big_Stupid_Jelly]

Andaius20 wrote...

you do have the option of not doing any of the loyalty missions though.....

Yes you do, but both you and I know what happens if you do that, and it ain't good.

[Andaius20]

C&C I say...you choose to not make sure your team is at 100% you face the problems in the end.

[MPaBkaTa123]

Andaius20 wrote...

C&C I say...you choose to not make sure your team is at 100% you face the problems in the end.

Jelly will obviously not listen so i suggest we return to the topic at hand

[Big_Stupid_Jelly]

MPaBkaTa123 wrote...

Andaius20 wrote...

C&C I say...you choose to not make sure your team is at 100% you face the problems in the end.

Jelly will obviously not listen so i suggest we return to the topic at hand

So you don't do the loyalty missions and all your team dies, great.

I couldn't really care less about Miranda or Jacob's problems, there's more at stake than her 'issues'.

Anyway lets hope Bioware can sort out their mistakes for ME3.

Modifié par Big_Stupid_Jelly, 27 février 2010 - 11:35 .

[MPaBkaTa123]

Mistakes? Almost everyone on these forums people who like the game or don't except the really hardcore haters and you find the loyalty missions to be awesome. Even those who found the game to suck thought the loyalty missions were pretty cool. Either way this is another example of someone forcing their in this case very unique opinion as fact.

[lumen11]

I suppose the nice thing about a 'back pack' inventory is that you can examine your loot right away. It was still nice to find a new weapon model or upgrade technology in ME2 (although it wasn't very rewarding to have those just lying around), but it wasn't tangible. You couldn't take a moment to see how good this new weapon was exactly.



Of course, with the new weapon system, new items are rarely significantly better then the ones you already have. Some are better than others of course but it is never a +1 to +5 improvement. The real difference is in how they handle.

[slyguy07]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

The side missions? Oh yea Samantha Bhatia was born and we learned nothing about the MEverse with it. The Fish on the Presidum or Fake ID just trumps that...

N7 Missions? Like save a quarian scout, stop a ship from crashing down a planet. Decide whether to let a nuke hit a city or an important military target.

Want to compare them to ME1 side missions?

Uh yeah I will. The ME1 side missions trump ME2 hands down. The quest to stop the spread of the Rachni Cerberus unleashed? The quest for Admiral Kahakou's revenge on Cerberus? The quest that had the backstory of the probes from the 1st Contact War? The list goes on and on.

The sidequests aren't bad in ME2 it's just that there really are nowhere near enough of them. Still I prefer ME1's sidequests slightly, but don't be so condescending to people who like ME1 more. Goodness.

Modifié par slyguy07, 27 février 2010 - 12:45 .

[TJSolo]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Well I could play along even though I was trying to compare apple to apples by just looking at the Citadel missions.

You can't just compare missions on the Citadel in ME1 to those on the Citadel in ME2, seeing as there are 3 hub worlds in ME2 as opposed to just one in ME1.

Compare the Citadel Missions to those small missions on Omega/Illium and Citadel in ME2. Let's see which are better.

As for N7 missions in ME2. There is also a great deal of storyline. For example you get see the inner working of the three mercenary companies Or take down a faulty Mech Factory. They aren't just one quest missions, rather they take place over 2-3 missions

Have you really played ME1? Cause there is more than 1 hub world in it. Once is about the same size that is accessible on Tuchanka while the other is slightly smaller than Ilium.
Comparing hub world quests is to ME2s hub quests is like comparing ME2 loyalty quests to ME1 personal quests. The focus of ME1 was on the other worlds and hubs so the missions were longer and gave those worlds added depth.
Likewise with ME2 the focus is on your team so their quests on longer than the ones in ME1.

For as much delving ME2 does with gang groups, ME1 delves into marines, Exogeni, Geth, and biotics.

Also what is questionable is your statement that some of ME2s side quests take 2-3 missions, it isn't unique to ME2.
ME1 also has quests that span multiple locations.

None of this matters in the scope of this thread. If you want to start one that states ME2 missions are inherently better than ME1 go ahead, I might have some comments for that.

The Citadel side quests are optional and do not have immediate effect on the game, thus are more comparable to each other.

[EternalWolfe]

In my personal opinion, ME2 was making the right steps when it came to an inventory. I am Commander Shepard, a previous N7 Marine of the Alliance Military, at one-time a Spectre(possibly again, depending on choices), and being backed by a company who's income is in the billions per year.



Why would I think to myself, "Hey, I'll just grab this helmet off the guy I just killed."? Or "hey, another weapon I've already got five of, yep, into the magic backpack - oops, the backpacks full".

Hold on a minute guys, I going to change my armor in the middle of space. Not to mention getting Colossus X armor from a downed probe on Luna or Turian Armor off a Geth Drone.



It makes more sense for a soldier to load up his armor and weapons when leaving the ship for a mission rather then carry it all with him. Picking up new weapons, theres no reason to carry every damn weapon you come across. In the time period, it also makes more sense to scan items and fabricate them myself then to gather them so I can sell to a pawn shop(which most shops aren't - they wouldn't buy your stuff anyways).



I do think they dropped the ball on certain points - there should have been more weapons, weapons should have been customizable, more armor parts, squad customization(not necessarily complete visual control like your player, but at least customized stat bonuses).



Ok, now that that's out of the way, I have a few idea on how to fix it for ME3.



First of all, basics:

*More weapons, with a unique feel and look(ie not the exact same weapon copied a dozen times). I'd say 4-5 of each. Scarecrow's thread had a pretty good idea of a way to do that.

*More armor parts, with better bonuses that make a difference(ie you can feel the difference between someone built for extra shielding and someone built for pure power).

*Moddable weapons, such as modular builds(like armor is), mod slots like ME1s, upgradable trees, ect. Something to make it YOUR weapon. I prefer the first one, myself. Such mods/parts/ect could be researched then equiped on the weapon.

*With the new number of parts for weapons/armors/ect,



Now then, a few points to consider from complaints:

*I've seen some complain about the lack of progessive weapon/armors(ie, using the same weapons/armors throughout the game). We do have it, in the upgrade system, but it isn't obvious. To fix that, I have two ideas:

[javierabegazo]

http://social.biowar...03/index/887957

Please post your ideas/hopes/dreams/suggestions for ME3 in the sticky, thanks

LOCKDOWN