10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Mister Mida]

You know, just out of curiousity, where there any threads like these when Mass Effect (1) came out? Where people there expressing their opinions about wether it was too much of an Shooter/RPG? Sorry if I went off topic here.

Modifié par Mister Mida, 25 mai 2010 - 09:13 .

[KitsuneRommel]

Darth Drago wrote...

If I had to classify them based on their powers (roughly):
Vanguard: Jacob
Sentinel: Miranda, Thane
Soldier: Grunt, Zaeed and Garrus (more so than another class)
Infiltrator: Kasumi
Engineer: Tali and Legion
Adept: Jack
Hybrid like: Mordin, Samara and Morinth.

For some reason I always thought that Jacob would be a Sentinel too. He really doesn't play like a Vanguard. I'd still place Garrus as an Infiltrator even though the class changed pretty much for ME2.

Edit: Figured out why. In Mass Effect Galaxy, Jacob could use an assault rifle, use tech
overloads, and use heavy weapons.

[SkullandBonesmember]

Mister Mida wrote...

You know, just out of curiousity, where there any threads like these when Mass Effect (1) came out? Where people there expressing their opinions about wether it was too much of an Shooter/RPG? Sorry if I went off topic here.

Aside from shooter fans complaining about the combat? Not that I recall.

[uberdowzen]

Darth Drago wrote...

-Sorry but if your talking about ME2 hen your way off. Most of the game is recruiting and babysitting your companions you get. Yes, you get a little teaser with Mordin about the possible genetic reasons the Collectors and Reapers are interested in humans but nothing else with the others. Your little group you get isn’t even that diverse in their powers or abilities when you think about it. Most of them are biotics (Jack, Jacob, Miranda, Samara/Morinth and Thane) in fact. Without Zaeed and Kasumi your group only consisted of 2 actual techs with Legion and Tali and 2 real tanks with Garrus and Grunt, yea you could consider Thane and Samara/Morinth but with their biotics they are kind of specialists in that way. Now considering that you have the option to turn Legion over to Cerberus and not birth Grunt your down to 1 of ech of those positions. Call me old fashioned but I would prefer quite a few more soldiers (warrior) or people can bypass security (thief) in my group than all the biotics (spell chuckers) i did get.

Oh, for god sakes, it's a game!! So you're saying you'd rather have a team full of soldiers rather than companions who are fun to play with? If that's how you feel...

-Maybe because the plot in DAO is pretty solid on its own. You feel like your on an actual quest to fight the ultimate evil and not just baby sit your companions. There have only been if I recall 4 arch demons or at least only 4 blights in that game world history and only a very few people know anything about how to fight the arch demon. Figuring out how to beat one is part of the plot since its pretty much considered a god. Its similar to beating the Reapers. But h yea, in ME2 you don’t go against Reapers at all or learn much at all about them that you didn’t know (or already guess) and nothing how to beat them.

The main quests take a hell of a lot longer than 45 minutes to do as well and you have significant choices and outcomes with them all. Make the wrong choice and you may loose a companion by the leaving of having to kill them. What did ME2 have? Wasn’t it just the one big choice on what to do with the Collector base? Wow, impressive… At least in ME1 you had Feros (colony‘s fate), Noveria (rachni), Virmire (who dies) and the Council (save them or not) to decide.

And you have choices like that in ME2. The Genophage cure, what to do with the Geth, the collector base, keep recruiting or attack now...You have just as many choices, and I'd say a few more that actually affect something.

[Massadonious1]

If there were any about the combat, it's because people had legitimate issues regarding it's quality.

Modifié par Massadonious1, 25 mai 2010 - 09:25 .

[uberdowzen]

Mister Mida wrote...

You know, just out of curiousity, where there any threads like these when Mass Effect (1) came out? Where people there expressing their opinions about wether it was too much of an Shooter/RPG? Sorry if I went off topic here.

No, because there was no existing fan base to complain about it. There were some sensible people complaining about how average the combat was.

[Axeface]

This thread would have been utterly win if you had titled it "You are Disappoint with Mass Effect 2? An open discussion"

Modifié par Axeface, 25 mai 2010 - 09:31 .

[Mister Mida]

uberdowzen wrote...

Mister Mida wrote...

You know, just out of curiousity, where there any threads like these when Mass Effect (1) came out? Where people there expressing their opinions about wether it was too much of an Shooter/RPG? Sorry if I went off topic here.

No, because there was no existing fan base to complain about it. There were some sensible people complaining about how average the combat was.

Average combat? Lol, I expected nothing else . After all, we're talking about an Action RPG, not an Action game

Modifié par Mister Mida, 25 mai 2010 - 09:44 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

Just a hypothetical question for anybody who has the guts to admit it.

Which would you rather have MORE of in ME3. Which do you prefer? I'm not asking if you'd like both. I'm asking which would give you more satisfaction?

Something similar to this implemented?



Or the 2 following examples-

************************************************SPOILER WARNING****************************************



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WhAwD3VGzQ
8:06 onward.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 25 mai 2010 - 10:01 .

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Just a hypothetical question for anybody who has the guts to admit it.

Which would you rather have MORE of in ME3. Which do you prefer? I'm not asking if you'd like both. I'm asking which would give you more satisfaction?

Something similar to this implemented?



Or the 2 following examples-



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WhAwD3VGzQ
8:06 onward.

Well, it seems like a kinda of stupid situation where you can't have both. I'd choose the latter.

Of course, any potential argument you have falls apart from the fact that one of the second lot of videos is from ME2.

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

Of course, any potential argument you have falls apart from the fact that one of the second lot of videos is from ME2.

Still don't read my posts.

When have I ever said that I hated all of ME2? I've made it quite clear I loved the touching, emotional moments, just that headshots don't do that for me.

[Lumikki]

uberdowzen wrote...

Mister Mida wrote...

You know, just out of curiousity, where there any threads like these when Mass Effect (1) came out? Where people there expressing their opinions about wether it was too much of an Shooter/RPG? Sorry if I went off topic here.

No, because there was no existing fan base to complain about it. There were some sensible people complaining about how average the combat was.

Yeah, problem isn't giving opinions as form of complain, problem is how it's sayed. There is major difference between whining every possible detail because player has become bitter or giving real constructive feedback. Like above sayed, this disapoinment is there because previos game existed and some players build they expectitions for sequel based what they wanted from game and they could not handle situation, when it did not go direction where they wanted. It's little sad, how ever, I also hope that developers understand where it's comming as what went wrong.

I my self liked both Mass Effect games alot, even if I think there is more fixing in ME2 than in ME1. Like I have sayed many times.

1. Mass Effect 1's problem was weapons in combat feeled wrong, long inventory with junk items and uber gears affecting to combat bad ways.

2. Mass Effect 2's problem was too many squad members what caused main story to be weak with it's plot holes, way too simplifyed general customation in gears and character power development. When it should have been more personal and bigger variety for every character, incuding squad members. Oh, and too much planet scanning for resources.

Both game also had some other minor issues, but they aren't so important than these for the players gaming experience.

Modifié par Lumikki, 25 mai 2010 - 10:12 .

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Still don't read my posts.

When have I ever said that I hated all of ME2? I've made it quite clear I loved the touching, emotional moments, just that headshots don't do that for me.

Well, that's not the impression the comes across.

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

Well, that's not the impression the comes across.

Then start reading my posts thoroughly.

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Then start reading my posts thoroughly.

Ok, how about this. I'll start reading yours properly if you start reading mine properly.

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

Ok, how about this. I'll start reading yours properly if you start reading mine properly.

Refresh my memory. When did I not read any of your posts thoroughly and what was it about?

[Mister Mida]

Lumikki wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

Mister Mida wrote...

You know, just out of curiousity, where there any threads like these when Mass Effect (1) came out? Where people there expressing their opinions about wether it was too much of an Shooter/RPG? Sorry if I went off topic here.

No, because there was no existing fan base to complain about it. There were some sensible people complaining about how average the combat was.

Yeah, problem isn't giving opinions as form of complain, problem is how it's sayed. There is major difference between whining every possible detail because player has become bitter or giving real constructive feedback. Like above sayed, this disapoinment is there because previos game existed and some players build they expectitions for sequel based what they wanted from game and they could not handle situation, when it did not go direction where they wanted. It's little sad, how ever, I also hope that developers understand where it's comming as what went wrong.

I my self liked both Mass Effect games alot, even if I think there is more fixing in ME2 than in ME1. Like I have sayed many times.

1. Mass Effect 1's problem was weapons in combat feeled wrong, long inventory with junk items and uber gears affecting to combat bad ways.

2. Mass Effect 2's problem was too many squad members what caused main story to be weak with it's plot holes, way too simplifyed general customation in gears and character power development. When it should have been more personal and bigger variety for every character. Oh, and too much planed scanning for resources.

Both game also had some other minor issues, but they aren't so important than these for the players gaming experience.

You sir/ma'am, present a good case.

[Ecael]

Mister Mida wrote...

You know, just out of curiousity, where there any threads like these when Mass Effect (1) came out? Where people there expressing their opinions about wether it was too much of an Shooter/RPG? Sorry if I went off topic here.

(Add brackets to the ends)

img]http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/5319/caela3a.jpg[/img
img]http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/828/caela3b.jpg[/img

There weren't as many people because there was nothing else with which to compare Mass Effect 1.

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

Refresh my memory. When did I not read any of your posts thoroughly and what was it about?

You seem to be under the impression that I didn't love all the emotional parts. I did, I loved them just as much as the shooting. I just really like the combat system, so I didn't mind that the balance was tipped a little bit in it's favour.

[Terror_K]

finnithe wrote...

Plus, borrowing from other genres has shown to create successful games. While the Mass Effect series is a great example, CoD and Bad Company's own basic RPG mechanics (XP progression, gun/character customization) shows how genre crossovers can work to create great games without compromising what makes the genre great in the first place. 

Yeah. Shame Mass Effect 2 couldn't do the same thing.

[Mister Mida]

Ecael wrote...

Mister Mida wrote...

You know, just out of curiousity, where there any threads like these when Mass Effect (1) came out? Where people there expressing their opinions about wether it was too much of an Shooter/RPG? Sorry if I went off topic here.

(Add brackets to the ends)

img]http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/5319/caela3a.jpg[/img
img]http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/828/caela3b.jpg[/img

There weren't as many people because there was nothing else with which to compare Mass Effect 1.

What does that banner thing have to with my question?

[KitsuneRommel]

Lumikki wrote...

I my self liked both Mass Effect games alot, even if I think there is more fixing in ME2 than in ME1. Like I have sayed many times.

1. Mass Effect 1's problem was weapons in combat feeled wrong, long inventory with junk items and uber gears affecting to combat bad ways.

2. Mass Effect 2's problem was too many squad members what caused main story to be weak with it's plot holes, way too simplifyed general customation in gears and character power development. When it should have been more personal and bigger variety for every character. Oh, and too much planed scanning for resources.

A "dream" ME3 for me would be

1. ME2 combat style but with more open locations like in ME1

2. A hybrid inventory system. Keep the weapons unique but let the players find/research/buy mods. Same for armor.

3. More skills for squadmates. Losing weapon skills = good. Combining Decryption and Electronics = bad.

4. Keep the ME2 style galaxy map. Feels more immersive (lol) than just moving your mouse pointer around.

5. Planetary exploration with (much improved) Mako or Hammerhead. Just give us quality over quantity this time please.

6. More squadmate talk

[uberdowzen]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

A "dream" ME3 for me would be

1. ME2 combat style but with more open locations like in ME1

2. A hybrid inventory system. Keep the weapons unique but let the players find/research/buy mods. Same for armor.

3. More skills for squadmates. Losing weapon skills = good. Combining Decryption and Electronics = bad.

4. Keep the ME2 style galaxy map. Feels more immersive (lol) than just moving your mouse pointer around.

5. Planetary exploration with (much improved) Mako or Hammerhead. Just give us quality over quantity this time please.

6. More squadmate talk

Check out the thread I started. In fact everyone should check it out, I personally think the list is a really good compromise for everyone.

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

You seem to be under the impression that I didn't love all the emotional parts. I did, I loved them just as much as the shooting. I just really like the combat system, so I didn't mind that the balance was tipped a little bit in it's favour.

No, I'm under the impression you think combat is just as important as story and there's such a thing as TOO MUCH dialogue/character interaction, cutscenes, and overall plot. Can you really say I'm way off base there?

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 25 mai 2010 - 10:31 .

[Arwyl]

Sidney wrote...

Yes but in that case the game is what, 10 hours long. That's a lot of lost content. ME2's plot structure allows me to enjoy all that extra-content pretty much guilt free in terms of playing my character.

There' just not a lot of ways to argue that in terms of serving the master of a game structure ME2's plot doesn't force as much suspension of disbelief as ME1.

I think you nailed it with those words, Sidney. That master game structure is blatantly present all the time in ME 2 and everything in the game serves that structure. It's one of the things that kill immersion for me, constantly reminding me that I'm not Shepard saving the galaxy, but just some nerdy girl playing a computer game with an obvious structure.

I agree that it makes no sense to go about doing 40+ petty side quests with little or no relevance to the main plot when you're supposed to be on a time race to save the galaxy. But at least, some thought was given in ME 1 to the way you acquired those quests,

Many times, you'd open the galaxy map and travel to a system to do something plot-related, and then Joker would say: "Commander, we have a transmission coming in", and Admiral Hackett would say something like "we have detected your presence in the So-and-So system", explain the problem and make it very clear that I was the only one who could take care of that job, and why. I could always say "I don't have time for this". And every time I got the job done, I'd get some feedback from Admiral Hackett and his thanks, as opposed to a mission complete screen. This made it all a bit more believable and kept me in character.

The way in which you recruited the characters in ME 1 was also a lot less obvious and it was nicely woven into the plot, as opposed to the plot being "go and recruit those characters" like in ME 2. To acquire Tali's, Garrus's and Wrex's personal quests in ME 1 you just talked to them because you felt like talking to them, and then they'd casually bring it up. And if you went to talk to them later they wouldn't tell you "I'm not saying anything else until you help me with my stuff". In ME 2, I felt pushed all the time. Kelly would push me to go talk to the characters; the characters would push me to go do their missions, the missions would appear as huge labels on the galaxy map... Reminders everywhere of what I was supposed to do, almost as if the developers thought that I would forget otherwise. I resented that. I prefered the care and effort that was put in ME 1 to integrate things, link quests, hide the obvious and make the story and the sequence of events flow more naturally, while at the same time giving me the illusion of free will, which I never had in ME 2.

Modifié par Arwyl, 25 mai 2010 - 11:25 .