10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Darth Drago]

I wont do a massive list like in other threads, but single out one or two things each posting.



-The Normandy. I hated the fact that several of your soon to be recruited companions had the only key to their rooms. It felt like a weak gimmick by being teased “you cant go in here until you recruit the person who has the key”. Just going by the locked room thing you would already know without a doubt that your missing two companions (the 2 downloadable ones) just by not having access to their rooms. Also on this note, not having access to the vehicle/cargo deck was rather lame as well. Hopefully it will get opened with the Hammerhead download.

[Jaysonie]

yoda23 wrote...

hex23 wrote...

yoda23 wrote...


WRONG! It's posts like this that got some of the good stuff in ME1 removed from the game. I just wish I had participated more in the ME1 forums before the XBOX twits got their hands on ME2. IMO the XBOX crowd has dumbed down ME enough already. Time to speak up for ME3 before the console crowd fully ruins the game for everyone else. Check my math but this WAS a dynamite Sci-Fi RPG. Not a FPS! But obviously it only counts if the RPG fans step up and start posting. i.e. Lack of Inventory, Fewer weapon choices, Boring planet scanning. I recall all the harrassment over the Mako and the elevator scenes and look where all that hot air got us, a linear FPS action game with fewer RPG elements and LESS exploration. Not this time, not for ME3! People need to speak up before the XBOX ers ruin that game too.

The game was made for Xbox first, then later ported to PC. It's an Xbox game.

Prove it!

The Pc version of mass effect was released 6 months after the 360 version.

[hex23]

yoda23 wrote...

Prove it!

And this is the exact moment this thread falls apart....

[Andorfiend]

hex23 wrote...

This would be like me saying "ME2 doesn't have huge flaws and everyone needs to accept that".

Heh. I'd be willing to state that. ME 2 doesn't have huge flaws. It does however suffer from some design approaches that rub some people the wrong way.

The inventory system isn't flawed, it's perfectly functional. It is however as attempt to reinvent the wheel when all it needed was some grease.

The loading screens aren't flawed. The problem is the elevator scenes weren't flawed either. Loading sucks. Heck I'm playing DA:O right now and I'd sacrifice a gerbil to Bill Gates to get it to load faster. They are both good approaches to solving a problem that isn't going to go away until computers are operating entirely on persistant dynamic memeory systems.

The scanning system isn't flawed. Per se. It is however fairly pointless. It's a timesink in a game that doesn't need time sinks. So why put it in? It sure as heck isn't fun. Nor does it add depth or verisimilitude to the universe. So why? Perhaps it's a flawed approach, rather than a flawed execution.

The upgrade system isn't flawed, but it is shallower, narrower and less visible than the mod system from ME 1. The problems with the ME 1 mod system was never that people were confused or flustered by it's depth or it's rich options, it's just that people got bored with umpteen levels of identical upgrades and having to manage the clunky inventory system.  To my mind they fixed the wrong problem.

[Knightsire]

Things I liked in ME2:

- Combat mechanics were faster paced.
- Storyline was epic, even though it seemed too short.
- There is mention of ME 1 love interests and that means a posibility they will carry over to ME 3.
- Every character seemed to have an original backstory that was interesting on some level.

Things I didn't like:

- Inventory is gone. I like the idea of having assets (weapons/armor/mods) or wealth to accumulate.
- Too few weapons. Can't customize them or armor. Instead, special bullet loadouts are considered powers? To me...that is lame because anyone should be able to use a different type of bullet class. I play a soldier and thought that they should get powers and not bullet options.
- The Mass Effect Universe feels like it shrunk...by a lot. Or at least the sandbox we get to play in. The scale seemed so much larger and imposing in ME 1.
- Character Levels/Growth Path seem superficial. There is no real meat to character progression anymore in ME2. Everything is overly simplistic now.

My biggest gripe was when they went and simplified things a lot. There is no depth...the game seems a lot shorter than ME 1, which felt more like a better blend of a story-driven action RPG with an abundant amount of sandbox-style elements.

The exploration and mechanics that make you want to explore, consume, and amass new experiences and acheivements is not there in my opinion. I played it once and will play it once more before ME 3 comes out, but I can't touch this game again otherwise...there is no motivation or inspiration to get me playing this 24/7 like the first ME.

Modifié par Knightsire, 28 février 2010 - 12:55 .

[Darth Drago]

Please keep it civil people. Note each other if you have to.

[hex23]

As far as "ME1" vs "ME2"...."ME1" is pretty terrible in comparison, IMO. And I've been playing RPGs since the 80s, so this has nothing to do with "RPG vs Gears Of War" or whatever argument people make.



Even if I agreed that "ME1" is a better RPG....which I don't....but even if I did agree "ME2" is a far superior game, over all.



I do agree though they did reinvent the wheel in a few places when all they needed to do was slightly fine tune. Like inventory for example.

[Andorfiend]

Darth Drago wrote...

I wont do a massive list like in other threads, but single out one or two things each posting.

-The Normandy. I hated the fact that several of your soon to be recruited companions had the only key to their rooms. It felt like a weak gimmick by being teased “you cant go in here until you recruit the person who has the key”. Just going by the locked room thing you would already know without a doubt that your missing two companions (the 2 downloadable ones) just by not having access to their rooms. Also on this note, not having access to the vehicle/cargo deck was rather lame as well. Hopefully it will get opened with the Hammerhead download.

This is something I noticed. Having sections of the ship you can't get into just because the NPC who is supposed to stand there hasn't been recuited yet is VERY much a JRPG console kind of thing. It's not needed, it's not like having Shepard walk into an empty room and ask EDI what's it's for would have somehow ruined the game. Not being able to walk into empty rooms however nearly gave me an apoplexy. I was about ready to order up some cutting charges so I could blow EDIs brains out the first time I played the game.

Seriously, I'm supposed to be the ship's Captain but I'm not allowed to look in the cargo bay? Or life support? Or gunnery? No way in hell would my Shepard put up with that crap, and that I had to rubs my nose in the fact that it's a video game and ruins immersion.

There were a LOT of things in the game that felt like the game was holding my hand because it didn't trust me not to be too stupid if it let me off the rails. Ad that feels like a cold wet slap in the face after ME 1.

[MassEffect762]

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

Modifié par MassEffect762, 28 février 2010 - 01:24 .

[Jaysonie]

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

And if we used my poll as a judge of fan reaction, i guess its safe to assume that bioware took ME2 in the right direction.

[SurfaceBeneath]

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

As someone who was on the ME1 forums the first several months of the game's release?

It was number 1.

[therhollywood]

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

i think both were a contributing factor i think they did listen to some
points from the forums but then as EA got control of it they had to
listen to them as well and there concerns. case in point the sex scens
were toned down because of EA and the inventory was probably a mix of
both. i would almost bet that bioware had a good idea on how to fix the
inventory system then EA came along and said drop it if they dont like
it. and this is no rant from what i have observed from game companies
is that one acquired by EA the whole system goes through a dramatic
change some for the better most for the worse. if you need evidence of
this do a Google search for Earth & Beyond which in my opinion was
a grate game and thousands of other people thought the same way but
they acquired it from Westwood when they bought them for the C&C
franchise but westwood had a contract to keep E&B running for 2
years after they were bought up. and the second that contract was up
they killed it off shut down the doors fired the Westwood employees
that were working on it.



i cannon t emphasize how much my hatred of EA is. any who back to the
topic at hand most post in here are hitting where i have been gripping
about since launch so as long as you keep it up i am hopefull that
things will change for the better either in me2 or me3 and who knows ea
might sell bioware to a competent game developer.

[SithLordExarKun]

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

EA had nothing to do with the design of ME2.
In fact to who ever wants to blame EA for the toned down sex scenes, don't because the saboteur, another EA game shows full  frontal nudity.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 28 février 2010 - 02:13 .

[lukandroll]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

As someone who was on the ME1 forums the first several months of the game's release?

It was number 1.

I was there too, there were a lot of whiners, more than now, If i recall correctly, but the thing is, in the end much of the complains came from people that wasn't that used to RPG's or people who couldn't adapt to the hybrid gameplay.
For instance, I never understood those who complained about the elevators, those things for me set the game apart from the competition.
One of the things I'd like to point out, Its that for me, ME1 was more immersive than ME2 in almost every way.
Sure, there were a lot of flaws, but the good overshadowed the bad, at least on the PC version.
ME2, for me its just one game more that I have beaten, and that's it.

Modifié par lukandroll, 28 février 2010 - 02:14 .

[therhollywood]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

EA had nothing to do with the design of ME2.
In fact to who ever wants to blame EA for the toned down sex scenes, don't because the saboteur, another EA game shows full  frontal nudity.

hmm why was that post even nessasary. pleas read befor posting

Modifié par therhollywood, 28 février 2010 - 02:19 .

[SithLordExarKun]

therhollywood wrote...


hmm why was that post even nessasary. pleas read befor posting

What? I was responding to this :

"case in point the sex scens
were toned down because of EA"

Which came from you obviously, you were blaming EA and they weren't responsible for the design of ME2.

Just pointing it out.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 28 février 2010 - 02:22 .

[therhollywood]

do you know that for a fact?

[SurfaceBeneath]

lukandroll wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

As someone who was on the ME1 forums the first several months of the game's release?

It was number 1.

I was there too, there were a lot of whiners, more than now, If i recall correctly, but the thing is, in the end much of the complains came from people that wasn't that used to RPG's or people who couldn't adapt to the hybrid gameplay.
For instance, I never understood those who complained about the elevators, those things for me set the game apart from the competition.
One of the things I'd like to point out, Its that for me, ME1 was more immersive than ME2 in almost every way.
Sure, there were a lot of flaws, but the good overshadowed the bad, at least on the PC version.
ME2, for me its just one game more I beat, and that's it.

You could not be more wrong. It was a Bioware game. Anyone on those forums making constructive criticisms were people who had experience with Bioware games in the past and I think you'd find very few people there or here now who wouldn't class RPGs as their favorite game genre. The fact is, the first Mass Effect had several problems, which is to be expected since it was Bioware's first attempt at a game of that type. The criticism back then was, as I recall, mostly rooted in the following categories:

1.) The combat was boring and required very little thinking to complete
2.) The squaddie NPCs mostly lacked personality and depth compared to last Bioware games (HUGE step down from Jade Empire and Baldur's Gate 2)
3.) The Mako was terrible
4.) The inventory was both terribly implimented and ruined the flow of the game
5.) Gaining levels did not feel important

Notice how all 5 of those categories were addressed in some manner in the second game. Perhaps not in a manner you prefer, but they were addressed. Also, it is your opinion that the first game was more immersive. Personally, I felt completely pulled out of the game each time I had to push the I button to omni-gel 100 different guns that I had picked up in my magic space pockets.

[SithLordExarKun]

therhollywood wrote...

do you know that for a fact?

Obviously seeing i actually own the game saboteur which shows full frontal nudity and owned by EA.

So obviously they weren't responsible for the toned down sex scenes. How can they possibly implement full frontal nudity in one game and tone it down in another?

In fact you made the claim that EA forced bioware to tone down the sex scenes, you prove it.

[therhollywood]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

lukandroll wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

As someone who was on the ME1 forums the first several months of the game's release?

It was number 1.

I was there too, there were a lot of whiners, more than now, If i recall correctly, but the thing is, in the end much of the complains came from people that wasn't that used to RPG's or people who couldn't adapt to the hybrid gameplay.
For instance, I never understood those who complained about the elevators, those things for me set the game apart from the competition.
One of the things I'd like to point out, Its that for me, ME1 was more immersive than ME2 in almost every way.
Sure, there were a lot of flaws, but the good overshadowed the bad, at least on the PC version.
ME2, for me its just one game more I beat, and that's it.

You could not be more wrong. It was a Bioware game. Anyone on those forums making constructive criticisms were people who had experience with Bioware games in the past and I think you'd find very few people there or here now who wouldn't class RPGs as their favorite game genre. The fact is, the first Mass Effect had several problems, which is to be expected since it was Bioware's first attempt at a game of that type. The criticism back then was, as I recall, mostly rooted in the following categories:

1.) The combat was boring and required very little thinking to complete
2.) The squaddie NPCs mostly lacked personality and depth compared to last Bioware games (HUGE step down from Jade Empire and Baldur's Gate 2)
3.) The Mako was terrible
4.) The inventory was both terribly implimented and ruined the flow of the game
5.) Gaining levels did not feel important

Notice how all 5 of those categories were addressed in some manner in the second game. Perhaps not in a manner you prefer, but they were addressed. Also, it is your opinion that the first game was more immersive. Personally, I felt completely pulled out of the game each time I had to push the I button to omni-gel 100 different guns that I had picked up in my magic space pockets.

i dont know i think they did a good job on the first one. and that magic pocket your talking about id a part of a RPG wich this game was moddled after RPG/shooter but now it just feals like shooter/adventuer and all the aspects of RPG are gone. they should have IMO re classed the game as that insted of RPG/shooter

[yoda23]

Andorfiend wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

I wont do a massive list like in other threads, but single out one or two things each posting.

-The Normandy. I hated the fact that several of your soon to be recruited companions had the only key to their rooms. It felt like a weak gimmick by being teased “you cant go in here until you recruit the person who has the key”. Just going by the locked room thing you would already know without a doubt that your missing two companions (the 2 downloadable ones) just by not having access to their rooms. Also on this note, not having access to the vehicle/cargo deck was rather lame as well. Hopefully it will get opened with the Hammerhead download.

This is something I noticed. Having sections of the ship you can't get into just because the NPC who is supposed to stand there hasn't been recuited yet is VERY much a JRPG console kind of thing. It's not needed, it's not like having Shepard walk into an empty room and ask EDI what's it's for would have somehow ruined the game. Not being able to walk into empty rooms however nearly gave me an apoplexy. I was about ready to order up some cutting charges so I could blow EDIs brains out the first time I played the game.

Seriously, I'm supposed to be the ship's Captain but I'm not allowed to look in the cargo bay? Or life support? Or gunnery? No way in hell would my Shepard put up with that crap, and that I had to rubs my nose in the fact that it's a video game and ruins immersion.

There were a LOT of things in the game that felt like the game was holding my hand because it didn't trust me not to be too stupid if it let me off the rails. Ad that feels like a cold wet slap in the face after ME 1.

I actually thought this aspect of the game fit with the whole Cerberus resurrection thing. Cerberus controls/owns the Normandy now, not the Alliance and especially not Shepherd. Shepherd is just a Cerberus tool now. Keeping things "locked" from Shepherd actually made the story "fit" a little better for me, IMO.

[yoda23]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

EA had nothing to do with the design of ME2.
In fact to who ever wants to blame EA for the toned down sex scenes, don't because the saboteur, another EA game shows full  frontal nudity.

"EA had nothing to do with the design of ME2" Are you kidding? I really hope this was not a serious comment, at least for your sake, LOL.

[therhollywood]

yoda23 wrote...

Andorfiend wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

I wont do a massive list like in other threads, but single out one or two things each posting.

-The Normandy. I hated the fact that several of your soon to be recruited companions had the only key to their rooms. It felt like a weak gimmick by being teased “you cant go in here until you recruit the person who has the key”. Just going by the locked room thing you would already know without a doubt that your missing two companions (the 2 downloadable ones) just by not having access to their rooms. Also on this note, not having access to the vehicle/cargo deck was rather lame as well. Hopefully it will get opened with the Hammerhead download.

This is something I noticed. Having sections of the ship you can't get into just because the NPC who is supposed to stand there hasn't been recuited yet is VERY much a JRPG console kind of thing. It's not needed, it's not like having Shepard walk into an empty room and ask EDI what's it's for would have somehow ruined the game. Not being able to walk into empty rooms however nearly gave me an apoplexy. I was about ready to order up some cutting charges so I could blow EDIs brains out the first time I played the game.

Seriously, I'm supposed to be the ship's Captain but I'm not allowed to look in the cargo bay? Or life support? Or gunnery? No way in hell would my Shepard put up with that crap, and that I had to rubs my nose in the fact that it's a video game and ruins immersion.

There were a LOT of things in the game that felt like the game was holding my hand because it didn't trust me not to be too stupid if it let me off the rails. Ad that feels like a cold wet slap in the face after ME 1.

I actually thought this aspect of the game fit with the whole Cerberus resurrection thing. Cerberus controls/owns the Normandy now, not the Alliance and especially not Shepherd. Shepherd is just a Cerberus tool now. Keeping things "locked" from Shepherd actually made the story "fit" a little better for me, IMO.

well if they were locked then they wouldent open them up for other crew members. thats like saying this no name guy that came on the ship is more trustworty than shepard. dose not make sens

[yoda23]

lukandroll wrote...

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

MassEffect762 wrote...

Makes me wonder what had a greater impact on the overall direction/design of ME2.

1) Fan input on the ME1 forums
2) EA(the boss) Time/Money decisions.

As someone who was on the ME1 forums the first several months of the game's release?

It was number 1.

I was there too, there were a lot of whiners, more than now, If i recall correctly, but the thing is, in the end much of the complains came from people that wasn't that used to RPG's or people who couldn't adapt to the hybrid gameplay.
For instance, I never understood those who complained about the elevators, those things for me set the game apart from the competition.
One of the things I'd like to point out, Its that for me, ME1 was more immersive than ME2 in almost every way.
Sure, there were a lot of flaws, but the good overshadowed the bad, at least on the PC version.
ME2, for me its just one game more that I have beaten, and that's it.

+1