10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Pocketgb]

And how is that a point in ME1's favor? It wasn't more in-depth than what we had in ME2 (neither were particularly 'deep'), it was just a feature in the game.

[Whatever42]

FataliTensei wrote...

Pocketgb wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
The current system is, IMO, the worst item and weapons system I've ever come across in an RPG, and that's saying something.

ME1 

At least it had inventory, and really ,regardless of all the complaints, it was a decent inventory, maybe a little clunky at times, but overall relatively easy to manage with a basic skill of organizing and identifying what you need and what could be sold/reduced into omni-gel.

99% of what I picked up after a certain point was turned into omni-gel. The inventory system was not only wretched, so was the quality of the inventory. And frankly, the whole bag of holding inventory system has always been lame in RPGs. Inventory items should have realistic weight, including ammunition. You want to carry 10 guns and 2 sets of armor then you're crawling, buddy.

But that's fine for a fantasy RPG where you're some wandering mercenary or FO3, where you're essentially a scavanger, looking for parts and ammo all the time. In ME2, you wouldn't be stripping the boots from the dead, nor do people leave several crates of lootable weapons and armor lying around everywhere. I can just imagine trying to run through the collector ship staggering under the weight of 18 guns and 4 sets of armor that they left around in crates because you wanted to sell it a few extra credits.

IMO, the only thing wrong with the locker system in ME2 is the lack of variety. I'm glad everything you pick up is useful in some fashion.

Saying that ME needs an inventory system because all RPGs must have inventory systems because they've always had inventory systems is not an argument. I agree that ME3 will definitely benefit from more personalization and customization because we RPG geeks love to tweak our characters but traditional inventory is not vital to that end.

[Terror_K]

Pocketgb wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
The current system is, IMO, the worst item and weapons system I've ever come across in an RPG, and that's saying something.

ME1 

The ME1 system was definitely flawed, but to me it was a decent system with potential let down in its execution
and the items themselves. The ME2 system on the other hand was a bad idea from the start, saved only from complete disaster by the weapon variation and the lack of junk (though this is also a weakness).

And modding alone makes ME1's weapon system more deep and customisable than ME2's is. There's nothing deep at all about static weapons that are always in the same places and upgrading in a completely linear fashion.

Both systems are flawed, but I'd take ME1's slightly broken system over ME2's shallow and linear to the point of pointlessness one any day. If it wasn't for the fact that each weapon in ME2's arsenal was so unique and different, nobody would defend it anywhere near as much as they do. Again... it's saved from absolute awfulness by the items themselves. And even then there's not enough of them and we lost two categories of items entirely.

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I'm
glad everything you pick up is useful in some fashion.

Another reason ME2's system fails, IMO. There's nothing special at all about any of the items when each one is just as useful as the others and there's nothing worthless in the game.

Modifié par Terror_K, 02 septembre 2010 - 05:52 .

[Revan312]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

99% of what I picked up after a certain point was turned into omni-gel. The inventory system was not only wretched, so was the quality of the inventory. And frankly, the whole bag of holding inventory system has always been lame in RPGs. Inventory items should have realistic weight, including ammunition. You want to carry 10 guns and 2 sets of armor then you're crawling, buddy.

But that's fine for a fantasy RPG where you're some wandering mercenary or FO3, where you're essentially a scavanger, looking for parts and ammo all the time. In ME2, you wouldn't be stripping the boots from the dead, nor do people leave several crates of lootable weapons and armor lying around everywhere. I can just imagine trying to run through the collector ship staggering under the weight of 18 guns and 4 sets of armor that they left around in crates because you wanted to sell it a few extra credits.

Let's all agree not to bring up realism in a game about immortal machines that devour the galaxy's inhabitants every giant cycle and which has the main character in the second installment come back from the dead because of "science stuff", that of which is simply ludicrous..

Faster than light travel, hand held rail-guns that somehow don't fry you even though your exposed to ultra high EMF levels, miraculous artificial gravity, mega terminator mutant fetus hybrid cyborgs, element zero, adepts, vanguard charge, nukes that use energy? etc etc...

To say that having an inventory capable of holding multiple suits of armor and tons of guns is the road block stopping this franchise from being considered a good representation of "reality" is a wee bit selective, considering the plethora of "magical" impossibilities involved here...

Modifié par Revan312, 02 septembre 2010 - 06:07 .

[Whatever42]

Terror_K wrote...
Another reason ME2's system fails, IMO. There's nothing special at all about any of the items when each one is just as useful as the others and there's nothing worthless in the game.

I think you are in a tiny minority there, even for RPG fans. I remember Blizzard trying that reasoning and they pretty much got laughed off their own forums. They changed and 99% of the player was happy about it. .

[Revan312]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
Another reason ME2's system fails, IMO. There's nothing special at all about any of the items when each one is just as useful as the others and there's nothing worthless in the game.

I think you are in a tiny minority there, even for RPG fans. I remember Blizzard trying that reasoning and they pretty much got laughed off their own forums. They changed and 99% of the player was happy about it. .

Umm.. have you played WoW?  The game is littered in crap items scaling all the way to uber powerful, half the reason anyone even plays that mind numbing game is so they can show off their leet skills with big, glowy weapons and armor they acquired through faaar to much farming..  In fact I'd say the entire point of that game is to acquire better and better gear since that's about all anyone does... Your logic isn't sound as that's the largest game on the planet and it's inventory and customization system is based on the very thing your trying to make sound unwanted...

Common -> uncommon -> rare -> ultra rare -> legendary --- WoW's loot system = tons of crap/diamonds in the ruff...

Modifié par Revan312, 02 septembre 2010 - 06:20 .

[Whatever42]

Revan312 wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

99% of what I picked up after a certain point was turned into omni-gel. The inventory system was not only wretched, so was the quality of the inventory. And frankly, the whole bag of holding inventory system has always been lame in RPGs. Inventory items should have realistic weight, including ammunition. You want to carry 10 guns and 2 sets of armor then you're crawling, buddy.

But that's fine for a fantasy RPG where you're some wandering mercenary or FO3, where you're essentially a scavanger, looking for parts and ammo all the time. In ME2, you wouldn't be stripping the boots from the dead, nor do people leave several crates of lootable weapons and armor lying around everywhere. I can just imagine trying to run through the collector ship staggering under the weight of 18 guns and 4 sets of armor that they left around in crates because you wanted to sell it a few extra credits.

Let's all agree not to bring up realism in a game about immortal machines that devour the galaxy's inhabitants every giant cycle and which has the main character in the second installment come back from the dead because of "science stuff", that of which is simply ludicrous..

Faster than light travel, hand held rail-guns that somehow don't fry you even though your exposed to ultra high EMF levels, miraculous artificial gravity, mega terminator mutant fetus hybrid cyborgs, element zero, adepts, vanguard charge, nukes that use energy? etc etc...

To say that having an inventory capable of holding multiple suits of armor and tons of guns is the road block stopping this franchise from being considered a good representation of "reality" is a wee bit selective, considering the plethora of "magical" impossibilities involved here...

Its willing suspension of disbelief. I can choose to agree to believe in a world with FTL spaceships. But nothing explains why Shepard would run around picking up stacks of worthless gear. Fantasy worlds are fine but the author defines the laws of that universe and then has to live within them. Its why people make FO3 mods to give ammo weight. Make the rules as "realistic" as possible and it makes the world more immersive.

Oh, I will put up with bags of holding where I can instantly swap gear gear in a heartbeat but I would prefer a system without out it. Especially since its rarely useful or fun. I suppose I can imagine a person who enjoys sorting through pages of useless junk. To me, its as boring as scanning for minerals. Actually, I find scanning for minerals more enjoyable but I appreciate mileage may vary. Why I don't understand is why people feel that an inventory system is required for an RPG and a locker system is unacceptable. Their argument seems to be its necessary because its always been there.

[Revan312]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...



Its willing suspension of disbelief. I can choose to agree to believe in a world with FTL spaceships. But nothing explains why Shepard would run around picking up stacks of worthless gear. Fantasy worlds are fine but the author defines the laws of that universe and then has to live within them. Its why people make FO3 mods to give ammo weight. Make the rules as "realistic" as possible and it makes the world more immersive.



Oh, I will put up with bags of holding where I can instantly swap gear gear in a heartbeat but I would prefer a system without out it. Especially since its rarely useful or fun. I suppose I can imagine a person who enjoys sorting through pages of useless junk. To me, its as boring as scanning for minerals. Actually, I find scanning for minerals more enjoyable but I appreciate mileage may vary. Why I don't understand is why people feel that an inventory system is required for an RPG and a locker system is unacceptable. Their argument seems to be its necessary because its always been there.

And I'm different, I can suspend disbelief on game mechanics much much easier than actual world explenations on how completely impossible things can somehow be possible.. I suspend disbelief on it all simply because it's a sci-fi game and the entire sci-fi genre has used the same tropes and physics bending BS for many many years, I simply think that's a pretty nit-picky reason to not have an inventory, actual unenjoyment however is a fine one..



And I'm not gonna defend the pages of random loot system that RPG's have used for eons, simply that ME2's goes so far in the other direction that it's almost pointless, might as well just stick a gun in Shepard's hands automatically and call it good, make it Gears of War in totality, it would work better than the paltry system presented in this latest installment, imo

[Whatever42]

Revan312 wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Terror_K wrote...
Another reason ME2's system fails, IMO. There's nothing special at all about any of the items when each one is just as useful as the others and there's nothing worthless in the game.

I think you are in a tiny minority there, even for RPG fans. I remember Blizzard trying that reasoning and they pretty much got laughed off their own forums. They changed and 99% of the player was happy about it. .

Umm.. have you played WoW?  The game is littered in crap items scaling all the way to uber powerful, half the reason anyone even plays that mind numbing game is so they can show off their leet skills with big, glowy weapons and armor they acquired through faaar to much farming..  In fact I'd say the entire point of that game is to acquire better and better gear since that's about all anyone does... Your logic isn't sound as that's the largest game on the planet and it's inventory and customization system is based on the very thing your trying to make sound unwanted...

I didn't mean to insinuate that WoW didn't have an inventory system. But it has a lot less useless crap than it used to. I remember raiding BWL for months, having to DE tons of useless crap. With every expansion, there has been less and less useless garbage. Partially because of the badges, partially because of better loot tables. In classic WoW, they randomly mixed stats on a lot of gear. They stopped that, better tailoring the gear and quest rewards.

And the talent trees... I remember a blue commenting on how worthless talents were necessary because they showed how good the good talents were. They have progressively reworked those trees to eliminate worthless talents as much as possible now.

When I stopped playing, I could easily farm for gold without collecting bags worthless junk.

But you're right. That is a game all about collecting the best gear. And my vaults did fill up with crafting mats and gear for alts or for off-specs. And it was a pain. So what did Blizzard do with this latest expansion? Rework the system again so I didn't have to collect 4 sets of gear.

[Whatever42]

Revan312 wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Its willing suspension of disbelief. I can choose to agree to believe in a world with FTL spaceships. But nothing explains why Shepard would run around picking up stacks of worthless gear. Fantasy worlds are fine but the author defines the laws of that universe and then has to live within them. Its why people make FO3 mods to give ammo weight. Make the rules as "realistic" as possible and it makes the world more immersive.

Oh, I will put up with bags of holding where I can instantly swap gear gear in a heartbeat but I would prefer a system without out it. Especially since its rarely useful or fun. I suppose I can imagine a person who enjoys sorting through pages of useless junk. To me, its as boring as scanning for minerals. Actually, I find scanning for minerals more enjoyable but I appreciate mileage may vary. Why I don't understand is why people feel that an inventory system is required for an RPG and a locker system is unacceptable. Their argument seems to be its necessary because its always been there.

And I'm different, I can suspend disbelief on game mechanics much much easier than actual world explenations on how completely impossible things can somehow be possible.. I suspend disbelief on it all simply because it's a sci-fi game and the entire sci-fi genre has used the same tropes and physics bending BS for many many years, I simply think that's a pretty nit-picky reason to not have an inventory, actual unenjoyment however is a fine one..

And I'm not gonna defend the pages of random loot system that RPG's have used for eons, simply that ME2's goes so far in the other direction that it's almost pointless, might as well just stick a gun in Shepard's hands automatically and call it good, make it Gears of War in totality, it would work better than the paltry system presented in this latest installment, imo

Oh, I can suspend disbelief on the game mechanics too. As I said, I can live with an inventory system. But I still fail to understand what is wrong with the current locker system, except perhaps too few options. There are most of the same options that existed in ME1. I can use an SMG that does more damage but lacks medium or long range accuracy. Or I can use an SMG that has awesome accuracy but does less damage. And I can upgrade those guns with new schematics.

This isn't much different than what happened in ME1 with upgrades and mods. Streamlined mechanic but largely the same effect. I had similar choices with every weapon and each had a very different feel with a different mechanic. To me, I felt far more variation with weapons in ME2 than ME1 - they felt and handled differently instead of simply having different stats.

Again, I'm not saying i wouldn't change anything. I think we should be able to choose ammo instead of having ammo powers. Interesting mods would be a cool addition. But we can have that without a traditional inventory.

[Terror_K]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...
Why I don't understand is why people feel that an inventory system is required for an RPG and a locker system is unacceptable. Their argument seems to be its necessary because its always been there.

You can't understand that, and I can't understand why people could actually like the incredibly shallow system ME2 presented us with.

Perhaps if there had been a decent amount of inventory, everything wasn't so linear and there was some actualy customisation it would have worked fine. One doesn't need a classic RPG inventory system in an RPG, but one does need a decent inventory in it, IMO.

People may find sorting through inventory boring, but as it stands I find the pathetic excuse for a system that ME2 has far more tedious. Nothing changes between playthroughs and there's nothing new or interesting. Nothing evolves. Nothing improves. It's all boring, tedious linearity. The armour is the only thing even remotely customisable, and it doesn't even act like real armour.

And I still haven't forgiven BioWare for those one-piece DLC armours. More because they didn't even tell us about it and it wasn't found out until people got the game itself and went "WTF?!" A shocking, terrible move. It may not be lying, but it's as close as one can get without doing it. I thought BioWare were better than that. Or at least I used to. Now I'm not so shocked.

[Revan312]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I didn't mean to insinuate that WoW didn't have an inventory system. But it has a lot less useless crap than it used to. I remember raiding BWL for months, having to DE tons of useless crap. With every expansion, there has been less and less useless garbage. Partially because of the badges, partially because of better loot tables. In classic WoW, they randomly mixed stats on a lot of gear. They stopped that, better tailoring the gear and quest rewards.

And the talent trees... I remember a blue commenting on how worthless talents were necessary because they showed how good the good talents were. They have progressively reworked those trees to eliminate worthless talents as much as possible now.

When I stopped playing, I could easily farm for gold without collecting bags worthless junk.

But you're right. That is a game all about collecting the best gear. And my vaults did fill up with crafting mats and gear for alts or for off-specs. And it was a pain. So what did Blizzard do with this latest expansion? Rework the system again so I didn't have to collect 4 sets of gear.

I haven't played in over two years but the player base has sluffed gradually off since Burning Crusade.  Not that that's because of the inventory changes, most likely because of the sheer number of MMOs out now, but it didn't seem like that was a huge concern even back in the day of its highest subscriber numbers.

Almost all MMOs have the same sort of inventory system, or at least one with a concentration on ever rarer power items.. Aion, Liniege 1/2, Age of Conan, APB, FF XIV, Everquest, SW: Galaxies, SW: The old Republic, Tera etc etc..  You may hate that system, I as well am not a huge adoring fan, but it is the mechanic people are most comfortable with and draw the most numbers.. Loot can be random or set, crafted or bought, regardless of how it's implemented, people are drawn to it and so saying Terror is in the tiny minority seems untrue..

[Revan312]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Oh, I can suspend disbelief on the game mechanics too. As I said, I can live with an inventory system. But I still fail to understand what is wrong with the current locker system, except perhaps too few options. There are most of the same options that existed in ME1. I can use an SMG that does more damage but lacks medium or long range accuracy. Or I can use an SMG that has awesome accuracy but does less damage. And I can upgrade those guns with new schematics.

This isn't much different than what happened in ME1 with upgrades and mods. Streamlined mechanic but largely the same effect. I had similar choices with every weapon and each had a very different feel with a different mechanic. To me, I felt far more variation with weapons in ME2 than ME1 - they felt and handled differently instead of simply having different stats.

Again, I'm not saying i wouldn't change anything. I think we should be able to choose ammo instead of having ammo powers. Interesting mods would be a cool addition. But we can have that without a traditional inventory.

Fair enough, you obviously enjoy a more streamlined and approachable system to one of complication and duplication. I as well enjoyed the fact that each weapon felt different, yet I still think the upgrade system and the lack of customization was pretty pathetic in comparison to the first..  I didn't like sifting through 100 items though either, most of which were just higher numerical values, but the mods at least added some flare and robustness sorely lacking in the sequal, imo..

As I said earlier however, I don't care one bit if they keep it the same as ME2's, that's not a huge concern for me, plot, dialogue, VO's, animation and universe depth are however the greatest and most important part of an RPG.  Gameplay mechanics are simply shades of preference and I won't begrudge anyone that enjoys it more than the original game's or vice versa, but damn if I can't objectivly state that the entire premise, execution and presentation of the story, characters and setting this time around wasn't down right laughable in comparrison to the first's..

Modifié par Revan312, 02 septembre 2010 - 06:53 .

[Gundar3]

Revan312 wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

99% of what I picked up after a certain point was turned into omni-gel. The inventory system was not only wretched, so was the quality of the inventory. And frankly, the whole bag of holding inventory system has always been lame in RPGs. Inventory items should have realistic weight, including ammunition. You want to carry 10 guns and 2 sets of armor then you're crawling, buddy.

But that's fine for a fantasy RPG where you're some wandering mercenary or FO3, where you're essentially a scavanger, looking for parts and ammo all the time. In ME2, you wouldn't be stripping the boots from the dead, nor do people leave several crates of lootable weapons and armor lying around everywhere. I can just imagine trying to run through the collector ship staggering under the weight of 18 guns and 4 sets of armor that they left around in crates because you wanted to sell it a few extra credits.

Let's all agree not to bring up realism in a game about immortal machines that devour the galaxy's inhabitants every giant cycle and which has the main character in the second installment come back from the dead because of "science stuff", that of which is simply ludicrous..

Faster than light travel, hand held rail-guns that somehow don't fry you even though your exposed to ultra high EMF levels, miraculous artificial gravity, mega terminator mutant fetus hybrid cyborgs, element zero, adepts, vanguard charge, nukes that use energy? etc etc...

To say that having an inventory capable of holding multiple suits of armor and tons of guns is the road block stopping this franchise from being considered a good representation of "reality" is a wee bit selective, considering the plethora of "magical" impossibilities involved here...

Im actually very happy to see this opinion. 

Although it has nothing do really with what you all are discussing, I'll just point out that I thought that it was funny that people took almost personal offense to the fact that Miranda wears high-heels and Samara has clevage amidst the entire universe of Mass Effect and the eventsa that are transpiring and random technology avalible.

Do I like the stream-lining of the inventory?  Yes and no.  I do miss the "inventory feel" and the progression and pride of finding better gear and upgrading my squad.  I also miss the simple aestheic of changing how my squad looked.  We lost those things going into ME2 which is especially true if the player didn't download anything.  DLC has made the game more fleshed out, too bad its for a price.  Ideally for ME3 I want a mix of both games.  I want the customization and pride of obtaining that awesome gun or amor from a mix of skill and luck, and also have weponry that varies in how its used.

I just hope that in ME3 thy will let us equip the squad in clothing or armor.  Not texture swaps.

[Lumikki]

I have not seen really good inventory system in any Biowares game yet. Kotor 1, ME 1, DAO and even ME2 all have problems. ME2 was best try so far and yes it was inventory, it just failed in variety and induvidual customation part. Just because the inventory list isn't looking in games interface same, what you people are use to, doesn't mean it's not inventory.

Inventory is just feature what allows player to make "gear" or "tool" choises and customation. That's all what it is.

The different between ME1 and ME2 inventories are, do you self loot and manage all the items what you don't need or does game do it behave of you. In ME1 you as player did micro-management and in ME2 game automaticly replaced newest versions of item in players use after research was done. This cause that in ME2 system there isn't really need of huge list of induvidual items, because all same kind of items are upgraded, so they doesn't exist anymore as induvidual items same ways.

What's the different, it's just how automatic item management is done. Why? Because it moves focus of gameplay in different aspects, meaning how much focus is in management of items. No, ME2 wasn't well done, but it was step in better direction, if there just would have been enough induvidual customation. You people hate it, because it's simplicity and lack of customation or because you can't admid that micro-management is something what you like to do in games.

I my self don't see how game become better if I my self have to manage huge amount of junk items manually. Why can't I just make the main choises and customation, let game system handle the upgrades (junks).

Real variety is when items feels different enough or has different  functions or are visually different. Changing sword to +1 to +2 is not real variety it's upgrade of same item. If you have upgraded item allready, why would you use old items and more important why you need manual management of upgrade. Haveing huge list of upgrade items in inventory is not variety, it's illusion of variety. Player will most of the cases allways want to use "best" version of same item they have. So, why waste players time to handeling items manually when it's not needed. To understand, do you really need Xenox armor I, II, III, IV ... XI or do you just need to wear "best" Xenox armor what you have, for it's function or visuality.

Modifié par Lumikki, 02 septembre 2010 - 09:34 .

[bjdbwea]

Lumikki wrote...

ME2 was best try so far and yes it was inventory, it just failed in variety and induvidual customation part.

No, it wasn't the best, and no, it wasn't even an inventory. A real inventory system provides a significant amount of distinct items, weapons and armor, the chance to equip and unequip items at any time except perhaps during combat, an economy to buy and sell stuff, a weight limit and/or limit on the number of items the player character can carry, and a neat and intuitive interface. ME 2 doesn't even try to provide several of these features, therefore it doesn't have an inventory in the first place.

You've said repeatedly now that you prefer it when games are simple and don't bother you with "useless" stuff. That's okay. But it doesn't make the system in ME 2 the better inventory. By the same logic, it could remove your choice to select different weapons and armor altogether, and it would be the best "inventory" ever.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 02 septembre 2010 - 11:16 .

[bjdbwea]

Revan312 wrote...

As I said earlier however, I don't care one bit if they keep it the same as ME2's, that's not a huge concern for me, plot, dialogue, VO's, animation and universe depth are however the greatest and most important part of an RPG.  Gameplay mechanics are simply shades of preference and I won't begrudge anyone that enjoys it more than the original game's or vice versa, but damn if I can't objectivly state that the entire premise, execution and presentation of the story, characters and setting this time around wasn't down right laughable in comparrison to the first's.

This.

[shootist70]

Revan312 wrote...


And I'm different, I can suspend disbelief on game mechanics much much easier than actual world explenations on how completely impossible things can somehow be possible.. I suspend disbelief on it all simply because it's a sci-fi game and the entire sci-fi genre has used the same tropes and physics bending BS for many many years, I simply think that's a pretty nit-picky reason to not have an inventory, actual unenjoyment however is a fine one..

I don't see it as a nit-picky reason at all. What you're saying is the equivalent of a sci-fi writer thinking that because his work requires suspension of disbelief then it also excuses the use of intrusive mechanics like infodump, plotdump and other clumsy exposition devices. And that's essentially all character/skill/inventory screens are: clunky use of infodump of the sort that decent storytellers wrinkle their nose at. It's a mechanical way of simulating character and story progression that doesn't need the sheer skill required to tie it into a story narrative.

Item/skill progression isn't a part of the true character and narrative progression that keeps a player compelled by conventional storytelling methods. It relies on intrinsic reward compulsion instead, and it's interesting that you brought up WoW on another post, as that's been criticised for its rat-maze reward gameplay to keep players addicted. Traditional RPG's suffer from the same problem - weak story and roleplay that can't keep a player compelled on their own merits so instead fall back on 'hunt the item/increase the skill' to keep a player going.

Stripping out reliance on item/skill based intrinsic rewards leaves the developer forced to focus on story and character driven roleplay instead to keep a player compelled. Just as stopping reliance on exposition devices forces a writer to write more powerfully. It's a good thing, honestly

Modifié par shootist70, 02 septembre 2010 - 02:53 .

[Terror_K]

 

Here's something else I'd like to see I did a mock up for: the option to take whatever weapons you like with you. You'd still be class restricted of course, but if you're the type of person who doesn't want to take a particular weapon type with you then I think you should be able to equip --as per the example here-- two sniper rifles of different types if you prefer. I imagine the hip slot would be restricted to pistol and smg, but the rest should be fair game, IMO.

The numbers with the weapon icons at the bottom are meant to represent how many of each type of weapon you have equipped and the total pool of weapons you have in each category. The weapons would be highlighted (as shown) to indicate which one was where. Heavy weapons, of course, would still be limited to one.

And yes... I'm aware the Shepard isn't wearing the items listed, but it's just an example.

[Terror_K]

Lumikki wrote...

I have not seen really good inventory system in any Biowares game yet. Kotor 1, ME 1, DAO and even ME2 all have problems. ME2 was best try so far and yes it was inventory, it just failed in variety and induvidual customation part. Just because the inventory list isn't looking in games interface same, what you people are use to, doesn't mean it's not inventory.

Inventory is just feature what allows player to make "gear" or "tool" choises and customation. That's all what it is.

The different between ME1 and ME2 inventories are, do you self loot and manage all the items what you don't need or does game do it behave of you. In ME1 you as player did micro-management and in ME2 game automaticly replaced newest versions of item in players use after research was done. This cause that in ME2 system there isn't really need of huge list of induvidual items, because all same kind of items are upgraded, so they doesn't exist anymore as induvidual items same ways.

What's the different, it's just how automatic item management is done. Why? Because it moves focus of gameplay in different aspects, meaning how much focus is in management of items. No, ME2 wasn't well done, but it was step in better direction, if there just would have been enough induvidual customation. You people hate it, because it's simplicity and lack of customation or because you can't admid that micro-management is something what you like to do in games.

I my self don't see how game become better if I my self have to manage huge amount of junk items manually. Why can't I just make the main choises and customation, let game system handle the upgrades (junks).

Real variety is when items feels different enough or has different  functions or are visually different. Changing sword to +1 to +2 is not real variety it's upgrade of same item. If you have upgraded item allready, why would you use old items and more important why you need manual management of upgrade. Haveing huge list of upgrade items in inventory is not variety, it's illusion of variety. Player will most of the cases allways want to use "best" version of same item they have. So, why waste players time to handeling items manually when it's not needed. To understand, do you really need Xenox armor I, II, III, IV ... XI or do you just need to wear "best" Xenox armor what you have, for it's function or visuality.

I disagee with almost all of this. ME2 had the worst inventory system out of all those games. On top of that, I don't like game that half play themselves for me. Too many modern games are doing this and I don't want Mass Effect to do it suddenly either. I want to make the choices myself and choose how I build my character and what loadout I want; I don't want everything just being done for me. That's another reason this game is so dumbed-down from the original: because no player really needs to make any effort to do anything. I remember Zero Punctuation describing this syndrome as something akin to the game acting like your older brother who wrestles the controller off you and says "you're doing it wrong!" (or something to that effect). What's next... Mass Effect 3 becoming like the original Assassin's Creed where you basically just run forward and hit the 'A' button repeatedly to win?

[Lumikki]

bjdbwea wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

ME2 was best try so far and yes it was inventory, it just failed in variety and induvidual customation part.

You've said repeatedly now that you prefer it when games are simple and don't bother you with "useless" stuff. That's okay. But it doesn't make the system in ME 2 the better inventory. By the same logic, it could remove your choice to select different weapons and armor altogether, and it would be the best "inventory" ever.

I'm not repeating that something has to be simple, allmost opposite. How ever, You don't seem to understand illusion of complex (variety) and REAL complex (variety). It's not about removing, it's about not filling game with useless items so that some dumm players think the game is complex because it has a lot of items. It's about not wasting players time something like manual micro-management looting because inventory, when it's not needed or have real purpose to improve players gameplay.

Modifié par Lumikki, 02 septembre 2010 - 01:58 .

[Lumikki]

Terror_K wrote...

I disagee with almost all of this.

Don't really care, we are allready in disagreement with this inventory subject.

I want to make the choices myself and choose how I build my character and what loadout I want; I don't want everything just being done for me.

Yes, I want choises to mean too and make choises. How ever, I don't want waste a lot my gameplay time choises what has no meaning. Meaning, to make choise it has to mean something too and not be some illusion that player had choise, when there wasn't really choise to make. If you haven't notice a lot of Biowares games choises has been illusion of choise. You make choise and notice it doens't matter what you did or choose in end

Modifié par Lumikki, 02 septembre 2010 - 02:00 .

[CatatonicMan]

Lumikki wrote...

Yes, I want choises to mean too and make choises. How ever, I don't want waste a lot my gameplay time choises what has no meaning. Meaning, to make choise it has to mean something too and not be some illusion that player had choise, when there wasn't really choise to make. If you haven't notice a lot of Bioawares games choises has been illusion of choise. You make choise and notice it doens't matter what you did or choose in end

Just going to point out that ME2 is is no way any better at this than any other Bioware game - and I would even go as far as saying it is worse than many other Bioware games, since most of the choices seem largely irrelevant.

Modifié par CatatonicMan, 02 septembre 2010 - 02:02 .

[Terror_K]

While I'd rather have real depth, I'd still rather have a facade and illusion of depth over no depth whatsoever and just pure simplicity. Even options with little meaning are better than no options, and limited choice is better than no choice. Especially in a game series that was supposed to primarily be about choice.



And again, the ME1 method is not the only way. Just because I (and the others who aren't happy with ME2's system) prefer it over the second games doesn't mean we don't see its flaws and want ME3 to bring it back in full force. I'd prefer a little bit of both, with a good deal of neither. ME1's method wouldn't have been so bad with better item balancing, better sorting and less junk, just like ME2's wouldn't have been so bad if it had modding/customisation, more items and less linearity. There's got to be a good middle ground which combined with some things neither system has would result in a decent system. Both systems are broken and bad in different --in fact, almost opposite-- ways, so there should be a good middle ground there that's better than both.

[Lumikki]

CatatonicMan wrote...

Just going to point out that ME2 is is no way any better at this than any other Bioware game - and I would even go as far as saying it is worse than many other Bioware games.

You are right in my opinion. In ME2 they did solved some Bioware games problems, but also removed a lot what what's problem in first place. What did not make ME2 better in bigger picture. It's more different direction than better. ME2 is even worst in some stuff than it's previous games, but it did improve also some areas too.

@Terror_K

I'm not asking simplicity, but I'm not asking illusion of complexity, because it's not any better than simplicity. I ask real complexity what has real meaning.

Modifié par Lumikki, 02 septembre 2010 - 02:06 .