10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

I'm sorry, I tend to ignore the Gears of War comparisons outright. I've played both games, and a) they have next to nothing in common and  Mass Effect 2 is superior in just about every conceivable way. All the devs said was that they looked at other games, Gears being one of them, for how to get something right that they had already attempted with ME1. But the pausing, the time-dilating powers and the more complex squad controls (the latter being absent from ME1's oh-so-much-smarter combat, we note in passing) are still there, and they're not elements you typically find in shooters because they don't mesh well with multiplayer gaming.

Granted, the word "shooter" got thrown around so much in the marketing that it really is puzzling given how little the game actually has in common with real shooters.

Lol, denial is not just a river in Egypt, its a post made by spacehamsterZH.

Bioware would disagree with you Im afraid. Even the Gears of War dev team would disagree with you:

Here.

"The thing that was cool was that Mass Effect is kind of an RPG for me,
with the cover-based shooting. I think there's a reason why it's been
successful. Because gamers love Gears"

Even Cliff Bleszinski thinks shooter gamers loving Gears of War is a reason for ME2s success (despite sales being nowhere near a GOW game).

Modifié par Dinkamus_Littlelog, 06 juin 2010 - 10:28 .

[Onyx Jaguar]

The cover mechanic that ME 1 used was the one in GRAW

The cover mechanic that ME 2 uses is the same as GEARS



However the gameplay itself is still closer to GRAW with abilities.

[Aphexdash]

spacehamsterZH wrote...
Nah, they pretty much scrapped it. I'll repeat this even though I've already said it today, just for you even though I know you're still going to insist that I'm blindly defending ME2 because I'm a dumb, dumb console shooter fan: one of my biggest peeves about ME2 is that it seems almost everything that didn't work as well as it could have in ME1 was just scrapped outright instead of trying to improve it. Except for the gunplay, obviously.

I'm not insisting that.  You picked 1 thing from my post and ignored the rest of it, harping on and on about it.  You're the one continually spouting that you're a dumb console shooter fan, i haven't ever written that.

[SkullandBonesmember]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

No, because the combat to interaction ratio in ME1 was about the same and I liked that game too. I'm, uh, sorry?

Forget it. Most of the RPG fans weren't satisfied with the character interaction, but you refuse to acknowledge that. Since you refuse to acknowledge what I quoted from DL, I from now on refuse to acknowledge you.

Kalfear wrote...

I wouldnt say marketting did its job though as we the RPG player were clearly lied to on many occations about ME2 containing as high quality and amount of RPG elements in ME2 as there was in ME2.

I was referring more to their marketing directed towards the shooter crowd.

[Pocketgb]

Kalfear wrote...

2nd off that reply wasnt even to you so why you taking offence?

Becauseit doesn't have to be directed towards me for me to be offended. If I was walking down the street with my friend and he'd comment on how much he hates a person's ethnicity, I'd be rather unsettled.

Kalfear wrote...

The rply was to a pro shooter troll that I try not to feed!

If that's the case, applying labels never helps. Regardless of who you're replying to. ShepardWrex may be unnecessarily (and hence hysterically) hostile in his posts but under all that there is discussion to be had from what he says.

Simply put: If you want to accuse someone of being an "idiot", then don't sink to such a level. In attempting to make *them* look bad you make yourself look bad.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 06 juin 2010 - 10:31 .

[RyuGuitarFreak]

bjdbwea wrote...

Then why did ME 1 still have so many decisions? Why did even side missions allow for different solutions? Why do the ME 2 side quests not offer any freedom or different outcomes, even though they actually do not require voice-overs, thanks to the email system?

The voice-overs are not the problem, it's the distribution. No one forced the developers for example to include so many companions. Arguably, that was detrimental to the quality and depth of every single one anyway.

Actually, there's 2 different outcomes in N7: Javelin Missiles Launched.
Think about how many recorded dialogue they added if you combine all the recrutiment and loyalty missions. Also, there were decisions and different outcomes in the loyalty missions.
"No one forced the developers for example to include so many companions. Arguably, that was detrimental to the quality and depth of every single one anyway." Geez. On the contrary. I can understand how add much more companions can be detrimental to the quality of a story. But the DEPTH I have to really doubt. Isn't the idea of add more, to bring more complexity? The whole addition of Cerberus guys was to change the idea that they are all evil and bring even more shades of grey to the humans for the player. How did Grunt and Mordin didn't add much more depth to the genophage question? How Samara didn't add much more to the religion part of asaris and how their biotic potencial may be dangerous to a few of her? How didn't Zaeed give more complexity to the story of the mercs we loved to kill (lol)? And most importantly, how did Legion didn't make we see the geth as completely different beings than ME1? I could go for almost every squadmate.
But, whatever, I don't think I'll change your opinion anyway. It's just a guess based on another post from you in another thread.

Modifié par RyuGuitarFreak, 06 juin 2010 - 10:33 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Mega lulz at the appropriateness of this article.

[Onyx Jaguar]

They're both shooters

[spacehamsterZH]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Lol, denial is not just a river in Egypt, its a post made by spacehamsterZH.

Bioware would disagree with you Im afraid. Even the Gears of War dev team would disagree with you:

Here.

"The thing that was cool was that Mass Effect is kind of an RPG for me,
with the cover-based shooting. I think there's a reason why it's been
successful. Because gamers love Gears"

Even Cliff Bleszinski thinks shooter gamers loving Gears of War is a reason for ME2s success (despite sales being nowhere near a GOW game).

I know they're saying that. I honestly don't understand it. Frankly, I think Bleszinski is just tooting his own horn and BW think it's a good way to market the game. The actual combat mechanics aren't really shooter mechanics. At least not significantly more than ME1's were, you had cover and point and shoot there too. Like I said, it's puzzling.

[Kalfear]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...

No, because the combat to interaction ratio in ME1 was about the same and I liked that game too. I'm, uh, sorry?

Forget it. Most of the RPG fans weren't satisfied with the character interaction, but you refuse to acknowledge that. Since you refuse to acknowledge what I quoted from DL, I from now on refuse to acknowledge you.

Kalfear wrote...

I wouldnt say marketting did its job though as we the RPG player were clearly lied to on many occations about ME2 containing as high quality and amount of RPG elements in ME2 as there was in ME2.

I was referring more to their marketing directed towards the shooter crowd.

ahhhh ok

I was being more literal heh

[Some Geth]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

They're both shooters

Yup 

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

They're both shooters

Wrong. One is an attempt at a hybrid that I personally think was successful despite the weakness of both elements individually. (I hardly used my pistol in ME1, and when I did, I took great pleasure in applying different mod configurations.)

The other is a shooter, with some mild "streamlined" RPG thrown in as afterthought.

[Onyx Jaguar]

Dinkamus_Littlelog wrote...

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

They're both shooters

Wrong. One is an attempt at a hybrid that I personally think was successful despite the weakness of both elements individually. (I hardly used my pistol in ME1, and when I did, I took great pleasure in applying different mod configurations.)

The other is a shooter, with some mild "streamlined" RPG thrown in as afterthought.

Your main method of attack and the Mako's attack is a shooter action RPG hybrid with more emphasis on Shooting.  In fact much of the game is spent in the filler Mako and there is absolutely no RPG elements outside of XP for which you scale with your enemies.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

spacehamsterZH wrote...



The actual combat mechanics aren't really shooter mechanics.

Cover.

Limb/Headshots.

Cover based 5 second health regen.

Ammo.

Almost completely static weaponry (bar a tedious incremental "upgrade" system)

The combat in ME2 was hardly anything BUT shooter mechanics.

[spacehamsterZH]

I love how you ME2 haters just decide everyone who doesn't agree with you is a shooter fan because you're the only true RPG fans on the planet, so therefore no self-respecting RPG fan could possibly like ME2. Oh welll. This thread was actually civil and interesting about ten pages ago, earlier today, when we were discussing the story structure differences between the two games, but it might as well go back down the sh*tter now, it's past my bedtime anyway. Have fun basking in your false sense of superiority for the rest of the night.

[Kalfear]

Pocketgb wrote...

Kalfear wrote...

2nd off that reply wasnt even to you so why you taking offence?

Becauseit doesn't have to be directed towards me for me to be offended. If I was walking down the street with my friend and he'd comment on how much he hates a person's ethnicity, I'd be rather unsettled.

WOW, so you think calling someone who posts over and over and over he thinks ME2 shoudl have been 100 shooter and refuses to read anything that disproves him a pro shooter troll the same as racial bias?

WOW, all I can say is you need to step away from computer and get out more
If that doesnt help, perfessional help might not be outta the question.

Pocketgb wrote...

Kalfear wrote...

The rply was to a pro shooter troll that I try not to feed!

If that's the case, applying labels never helps. Regardless of who you're replying to. ShepardWrex may be unnecessarily (and hence hysterically) hostile in his posts but under all that there is discussion to be had from what he says.

Simply put: If you want to accuse someone of being an "idiot", then don't sink to such a level. In attempting to make *them* look bad you make yourself look bad.

Says you. Thats your opinion and maybe in this new ultra sensative touchy feely world thats true but im older and come from a time where we said

If its quakes likea  duck
walks likea duck
flys like a duck
ITS A DUCK!

Labels be damned!

Modifié par Kalfear, 06 juin 2010 - 10:40 .

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Onyx Jaguar wrote...

Your main method of attack and the Mako's attack is a shooter action RPG hybrid with more emphasis on Shooting.  In fact much of the game is spent in the filler Mako and there is absolutely no RPG elements outside of XP for which you scale with your enemies.

My main method of attack was a combination of tech/biotic powers, with occasional use of a sidearm.

I used the mako for combat intermittently. I actually got on and faught enemies on foot on a great deal of occasions. It was actually as much a method of transportation as a combat tank.

In ME2, I move from cover to cover, using my weapons as much or even more frequently than my powers because of universal cooldown, and on higher difficulties nerfed biotics/tech that enemy defenses make them immune to.

[cachx]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...
No, because the combat to interaction ratio in ME1 was about the same and I liked that game too. I'm, uh, sorry?

Forget it. Most of the RPG fans weren't satisfied with the character interaction, but you refuse to acknowledge that. Since you refuse to acknowledge what I quoted from DL, I from now on refuse to acknowledge you.

I'm a rpg fan and I was fine with it. Claiming that you and the other 10 guys that complain here are "most" of the RPG fans is just crossing into delusion territory.

By the way, in the subject of dialogue, this is a good thread.

[Darth Drago]

On the marketing of both games:

ME1 Trailers.
You will clearly see RPG mentioned in the first one in in a few seconds. The second one doesn’t have RPG mentioned but it looks more like how the game is played, cinematic.


　
ME2 Trailers.
Funny they have no mention of RPG in them, but is it needed if it’s the sequel to one? They do show a lot of combat in the first one. Love the second one how it emphasizes Collectors a lot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBRo7JWy744
http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/14235013/mass-effect-2/videos/me2_trl_launchtrailer_12010.html

[Aphexdash]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

I love how you ME2 haters just decide everyone who doesn't agree with you is a shooter fan because you're the only true RPG fans on the planet, so therefore no self-respecting RPG fan could possibly like ME2. Oh welll. This thread was actually civil and interesting about ten pages ago, earlier today, when we were discussing the story structure differences between the two games, but it might as well go back down the sh*tter now, it's past my bedtime anyway. Have fun basking in your false sense of superiority for the rest of the night.

Man, inferiority complex much?  Seriously, take a deep breath, calm down and actually read complete posts.

[RyuGuitarFreak]

cachx wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...
No, because the combat to interaction ratio in ME1 was about the same and I liked that game too. I'm, uh, sorry?

Forget it. Most of the RPG fans weren't satisfied with the character interaction, but you refuse to acknowledge that. Since you refuse to acknowledge what I quoted from DL, I from now on refuse to acknowledge you.

I'm a rpg fan and I was fine with it. Claiming that you and the other 10 guys that complain here are "most" of the RPG fans is just crossing into delusion territory.

By the way, in the subject of dialogue, this is a good thread.

I'm an rpg fan and a shooter fan. How is this possible? I must be some kind of monster.

Modifié par RyuGuitarFreak, 06 juin 2010 - 10:45 .

[Some Geth]

cachx wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...
No, because the combat to interaction ratio in ME1 was about the same and I liked that game too. I'm, uh, sorry?

Forget it. Most of the RPG fans weren't satisfied with the character interaction, but you refuse to acknowledge that. Since you refuse to acknowledge what I quoted from DL, I from now on refuse to acknowledge you.

I'm a rpg fan and I was fine with it. Claiming that you and the other 10 guys that complain here are "most" of the RPG fans is just crossing into delusion territory.

By the way, in the subject of dialogue, this is a good thread.

But you know if you get like 2 guys to say it sucks it must suck 

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

scyphozoa wrote...

still the rpg discussion about a franchise that was not designed to be an rpg?

but include rpg as a massive part, as well as shooter, and yet the sequel almost entirely focuses on the shooter?

Yes, still discussion about that.

But of course, discontent with the games change of direction doesnt merit discussion.

We should all just lie down and take what we are given....

[Kalfear]

cachx wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...
No, because the combat to interaction ratio in ME1 was about the same and I liked that game too. I'm, uh, sorry?

Forget it. Most of the RPG fans weren't satisfied with the character interaction, but you refuse to acknowledge that. Since you refuse to acknowledge what I quoted from DL, I from now on refuse to acknowledge you.

I'm a rpg fan and I was fine with it. Claiming that you and the other 10 guys that complain here are "most" of the RPG fans is just crossing into delusion territory.

By the way, in the subject of dialogue, this is a good thread.

hmmmm, guess we have different opinions of a good "DISCUSSION"

That thread is "thow who shall not be named"  with a opening post and everyone saying good job after it. Kinda light on any discussion if you ask me!

See my signature for a great DISCUSSION on interaction, dialogue, story boards, and everything ME3 needs.