10273 réponses à ce sujet

[Terror_K]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

I still maintain that having no inventory system at all is better than having one that's good in theory but crappily executed. Not to say the ideal case of having an inventory system that's good both in theory and execution isn't what I'd expect from a perfect world, but I know which of the two cases we actually have kept me consistently entertained.

That's all very well, but however you feel about ME1's inventory system, I still urge people to let BioWare know that the ME2 version is not the answer, otherwise there's no way things will change for ME3 and we'll get a deeper, more meaningful inventory system. Even if you think it's better in ME2, you have to admit that it's not ideal and could do with a lot more depth.

All defending it and praising it is going to do is send BioWare the message that they did the right thing for the Mass Effect series and result in the same thing for ME3. Even if you'd find that acceptable (I personally wouldn't, but you may) if there's a chance to get things to actually be better and get an inventory system that works then I believe it should be made clear to BioWare that this is what you want.

After all, better than ME1's way of doing things doesn't mean it's automatically good. As far as I'm concerned it's not and it has to either go or get a lot more added to it to give it some proper depth, customisation and variation. Better or not, the ME2 system is still bad.

[Terror_K]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

No game would consider a simple, linear upgrade system as modding. It's NOT modding.

You modify, i.e. change, upgrade, your weapons. It is therefore weapon-modding. Whether you want to call it that is another thing entirely, but the upgrade system is just Mass Effect 2's particular representation of weapon-modding.

*sigh* Again, you're just talking semantics here. No game would call that a weapon modding system and refer to it as such. It's not weapon modding when you don't actually alter the weapons and you can upgrade them all fully.

You know what I'm talking about, so stop getting so finnicky about silly little details like this when you know full well that ME2 doesn't have a proper item modding system at all. Or are you actually defending the POS of a research/upgrade system that ME2 laughably calls "customisation"?

[upsettingshorts]

I don't call it customization. I call it research and upgrading. Which is what it is. And it works fine.



That being said, the "ideal" inventory system is somewhere between ME1's piles of junk that all looked alike and collected in your inventory like so much trash and ME2's Rainbow Six-like "choose your loadout" system.

[shootist70]

I find inventory irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that a character learns further combat tactics, which are suited to their role, as they progress. Doesn't matter how it's implemented. Roleplaying shouldn't be represented by item and gear fiddling.

Modifié par shootist70, 07 septembre 2010 - 10:22 .

[Lumikki]

Terror_K wrote...

Even if you think it's better in ME2, you have to admit that it's not ideal and could do with a lot more depth.

Yes, we agree in that. It's too simple, it needs more variety and customation, modificate weapons and armors more induvidual ways, not just so general.

All defending it and praising it is going to do is send BioWare the message that they did the right thing for the Mass Effect series and result in the same thing for ME3.

Problem is not that we want to send message that ME2 is okey as it is, problem is we don't want to send message that ME1 was okey or could be fixed to be better. We want to send message fix ME2 as add more variety, modification and customation in it. Meaning in our opinion ME1 inventory systems base was bad and can't be fixed without bringing some problems back. Example DAO has also some of same problems what ME1 has, even if it's not so strong there as it was in ME1.

After all, better than ME1's way of doing things doesn't mean it's automatically good. As far as I'm concerned it's not and it has to either go or get a lot more added to it to give it some proper depth, customisation and variation. Better or not, the ME2 system is still bad.

I agree in some stuff. ME1 has alot more customation, but the base of the system is better in ME2. I don't mean amount of customation or some missing modification possibilities, but how it's handeled. So, in my opinion it's better increase variety, modification possibilities and customation in ME2, than send message that ME1 should be fixed. Like you sayed we don't want to send wrong message. If you disagree with me on this, then we can't avoid to send mixed message, because we disagree how it's should be done.

All inventory systems are build around three level, selection/customation, storage and looting. The top level where selection and customation happens for player can be very same kind in both ME1 and ME2. How ever, two lower levels (storage and looting) has major fundamental difference between ME1 and ME2.  The problems what ME1 has, are all connected in these two lower level (storage and looting). While ME2 has no problems there, but ME2 has lack of modification and customation in top level, what can easyly fixed just adding more variety. Because adding more variety in ME2's top level, doesn't make lower levels bad in ME2, like it does in ME1. This is because ME2 doesn't have inventory storage limits, so no need selecting loot, just take all because all what you get is useful. Also Me2 doens't have problem with induvidual items or different versions of them, because items aren't be storaged induvidually, what would cause big inventory lists. ME2 has no this kind of problems in two lower level, what allways exist in ME1 type of inventory system. Induvidualism vs variety problem.

Modifié par Lumikki, 07 septembre 2010 - 12:08 .

[Jebel Krong]

i certainly don't like me1's system of "loot drops" i think researching and modding should be done on-ship after certain conditions are met (you found some interesting research on planet x, which could be combined with material y you found somewhere else etc) - confine it and make it logical and it would work so much better.

[Solaris Paradox]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I don't call it customization. I call it research and upgrading. Which is what it is. And it works fine.

That being said, the "ideal" inventory system is somewhere between ME1's piles of junk that all looked alike and collected in your inventory like so much trash and ME2's Rainbow Six-like "choose your loadout" system.

As I said, Dirge of Cerberus has a really good example of the sort of inventory system Mass Effect could do with. You had an assortment of weapons with a number of slots for particular types of upgrades, i.e. different barrels, Materia, scopes, and whatnot. You could equip each weapon with an assortment of different parts to tailor them to your playstyle. It wasn't especially well-balanced--one of the results was that you could slap a scope and a long barrel on your handgun and suddenly have no need for a rifle--but the basic principle was awesome and it was deep enough without being time-wasting or convoluted. Dirge of Cerberus also encouraged accuracy by making shots affect different body parts differently, same as ME2 does, so it was also a system that worked well with player skill instead of just focusing on character stats (although it did have target assist options for those who needed them). You could upgrade different weapons and parts as well.

That the game in quest was notable only for its sublime blandness is beside the point. The system would be awesome in a Mass Effect game.

[Embrosil]

Well to add to the discussion, ME2 is not what I expected. Mostly because I was not expecting another mindless shooter. And yes, it is mindless as you ALWAYS fight in tiny areas full of things to hide behind. Nothing to hide behind? Relax, no fight is going to happen. I really liked ME1 and open space where sniper rifle had its use. Who would use a sniper rifle to kill enemies few meters away?? The second thing I do not like is the lack of inventory and loot. But after few playthrougs I must admit, the ME2 system is better, with some exceptions. I like the idea of fewer weapons and armor. However I find it really stupid there are not any stats. I still have no idea which assault rifle is better. The verbal description says the same. And why the hell is ammo type an ability? We can invoke ammo types by thoughts? Not to mention that totaly idiotic need of ammo, oh I forgot, it is not ammo. It looks like ammo, behaves like ammo, but it is not ammo. OMG. If it was in ME1, I would not mind, but to make such a change, just to make the game look more like a shooter is simply stupid. Moreover those cells are all the same, so why the hell can not we use them for all our weapons? I want to use my assault rifle, here and now, but now, some genius found it funny FORCING us to switch weapons, because we ran out of ammo, which is not ammo. I really hope ME3 will have some mix of ME1 and ME2 elements like upgradable weapons and armors (armors for companions as well, those "costumes" are really lame) with the ME2 system of equipping prior a mission.

But the most disappointing part for me is the story. I still do not believe that my Paragon Shepard so happily accepts to work for terrorists. I have been waiting when he shuts EDI, locks those two cronies (Jakob and Miranda) and takes real command. But nothing happened. Second thing is the council and its reaction. I would really like to meet that "screenwriter". I hope he got fired immediately after the game release. But the most disturbing thing is that the story is not epic. In any way. How did you feel when you saw Alliance fleet jumping to aid the Destiny Ascention. How did you feel when you saw Earth ships attacking the Reaper with all they got? There is not such a moment in ME2. Moreover ME2 "story" does not move the trilogy anywhere. If you go from ME1 to ME3 directly, you will not miss anything. And when you play ME2, you end at the same point you started. But I am sure most, if not all, of my complains have already been mentioned, otherwise the tpic would not be 399 pages long So now I just hope they will learn and ME3 will be the best game of the series.

[Terror_K]

For the record, I don't expect or even want them to go back to how things were in ME1 either. I do still think ME1 did things better (in the sense that it at least did offer some customisation and a small amount of depth) but I don't think going back is something BioWare will do, and nor do I think it's the answer. While I do think ME1's systems could be fixed with some work, it's not the ideal solution. But I do think they should at least look back at ME1 and look at what it did give us that ME2 didn't, and that they should also look at what ME2 lacked and try to sort that out and give it more depth, as well as eliminating the factors that make it shallow, linear and boring.



Those who defend ME2 need to realise that those of us who feel ME1 did things better and that ME2 did a poor job of it aren't actually asking for BioWare to put things back to the way they were, but to at least give us that which was missing from the transition between both games. The answer lies somewhere in the middle. Unfortunately I believe that with BioWare's current attitude of late that they really believe in this stupid notion that "simple = better" and that they don't really give a toss about RPG depth any more if making things simple and uncomplicated to the point of complete shallowness will get more people buying their game. They don't seem to want to make Mass Effect like they originally planned any more and have shifted their entire philosophy.



It just seems like issues with ME2 are falling on dead ears. And I can't help but feel if BioWare were the company they used to be that they wouldn't have made such bad design decisions in the first place. The whole of ME2 screams this: that it's deliberate. To coin an old term attributed to Bart Simpson in the early 90's, "it's an underachiever, and proud of it."

[Pocketgb]

Terror_K wrote...
I think you missed the point of what I was saying. What I meant is that ME1 at least tried to have some depth and variation, even if it didn't quite pull it off. ME2 didn't even try and went for the simplest "solutions" possible.

Bioware have pretty much always tried to do so. Not everyone appreciates it.

Terror_K wrote...
If I consider it a problem with the game it's a problem with the game from my perspective. That's what all of these discussions are about after all. Why is this suddenly any more different than any other point I've brought up?

Because presentation matters.

Terror_K wrote...
And there's a difference between a rare drop that's the same each time and every item being exactly as special as every other item (i.e. not really special at all) in such a limited pool where absolutely nothing is a surprise. How is this in any way a satisfactory system?

That's called balance, and while it still wasn't achieved it was pretty darn class.

And you don't need good loot for it to feel 'special'. In Morrowind the best items you can find are all set at predetermined places, some more interesting than others. For example: The strongest sets of armor are only gained through good sleuthing around, not just by earning a good dice-roll.

And while ME2 didn't really have any significant finds, ME1 didn't have any significant drops. Bear in mind when I compare ME1 and 2 as such it's to highlight how both are more of the same, which is one of my main points.

Terror_K wrote...
If ME1's items had been in the same places each time people wouldn't even need to bother with the other items at all: they'd just rush straight to where the Colossus X was.

That's true if you're crappy at game design. Most 'somewhat smart' developers make good loot difficult to get.

Terror_K wrote...
Do you honestly believe that ME1 was so beyond help that it couldn't have been tweaked and improved?

There's always room for improvement, what matters is if it's better to improve what you've started or start up from scratch.

Terror_K wrote...
If that's the case, how did you even get into it in the first place?

I've told you - time and time again - that there's always more to a Bioware game. I've said numerous times that I've rarely found newer Bioware games satisfactory in regards to their mechanics - yet I've still been an avid and massive fans of their games.

Terror_K wrote...
I swear to God... there have been complaints and hyperbole concerning ME1 that I never saw until after ME2 came out. It doesn't matter that ME1 was flawed, what matters is what did ME2 really do to improve upon it and what did it do to add depth? As far as I'm concerned, in the key areas, absolutely nothing.

Which is - in case you forgot - my disappointment with ME2: While I found it more enjoyable to play, it didn't increase the depth at all. This is not to say that what they did was worthless, but a more improved ME2 would be my personal want for ME3, not an improved ME1.

Terror_K wrote...
And I don't get how people can defend ME2 and yet be unhappy with ME1 when they claim to want more depth and complexity...

Many consider both games to lack a large amount of depth. And you know my lack of faith in Bioware making in-depth and balanced systems so I'm largely indifferent since they seem to always fail.

Terror_K wrote...
Oh please... now you're putting words in my mouth. You know what I'm talking about.

I don't, actually. You'll have to be specific.

[Kavadas]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

That being said, the "ideal" inventory system is somewhere between ME1's piles of junk that all looked alike and collected in your inventory like so much trash and ME2's Rainbow Six-like "choose your loadout" system.

I think the ideal ME3 inventory already exists and we saw it in ME2: the N7 armor system.

Everything is modular and there's no worry when it comes to quantity.  Add back the sockets to armor and weapons and then make those mods exactly like the N7 armor pieces: once you have them you have them.  Simple.

Ideally, I'm somewhat torn between making all armor pieces purely aesthetic with an armor mod socket on each pieces, for ultimate appearance and performance customization, or tying appearance to a desired mod.

Think I'd prefer the modular system where the armor pieces are purely aesthetic and you can just fill up the sockets.

Pie in the sky but if you could make the installed mods influence the appearance of weapons and armor every so slightly that would be pretty cool too.

On the weapon side of things I'd like to see ammo go back to weapon mods as well.  Just give every weapon two sockets; one for ammo and one for everything else.

We don't need seventeen levels of items or have to worry about acquiring large quantities of them.  ME2 got it right when it came to weapons and I would simply extend that same collection mechanic to weapon and armor mods (make them found, purchaseable, mission rewards,et cetera).

Let each squyad mate come fully outfitted with generic weapon and armor mods so the ADHD crowd won't **** and moan about how difficult dragging a GUI element onto another GUI element is.

If people want to outfit their squad with more exotic mods then by all means, micromanage away.

That's what I'd like to see.

Modifié par Kavadas, 07 septembre 2010 - 05:59 .

[Iakus]

Embrosil wrote...

But the most disappointing part for me is the story. I still do not believe that my Paragon Shepard so happily accepts to work for terrorists. I have been waiting when he shuts EDI, locks those two cronies (Jakob and Miranda) and takes real command. But nothing happened. Second thing is the council and its reaction. I would really like to meet that "screenwriter". I hope he got fired immediately after the game release. But the most disturbing thing is that the story is not epic. In any way. How did you feel when you saw Alliance fleet jumping to aid the Destiny Ascention. How did you feel when you saw Earth ships attacking the Reaper with all they got? There is not such a moment in ME2. Moreover ME2 "story" does not move the trilogy anywhere. If you go from ME1 to ME3 directly, you will not miss anything. And when you play ME2, you end at the same point you started. But I am sure most, if not all, of my complains have already been mentioned, otherwise the tpic would not be 399 pages long So now I just hope they will learn and ME3 will be the best game of the series.

I like this human.  He understands

[wrdnshprd]

Terror_K wrote...

Solaris Paradox wrote...

I still maintain that having no inventory system at all is better than having one that's good in theory but crappily executed. Not to say the ideal case of having an inventory system that's good both in theory and execution isn't what I'd expect from a perfect world, but I know which of the two cases we actually have kept me consistently entertained.

That's all very well, but however you feel about ME1's inventory system, I still urge people to let BioWare know that the ME2 version is not the answer, otherwise there's no way things will change for ME3 and we'll get a deeper, more meaningful inventory system. Even if you think it's better in ME2, you have to admit that it's not ideal and could do with a lot more depth.

All defending it and praising it is going to do is send BioWare the message that they did the right thing for the Mass Effect series and result in the same thing for ME3. Even if you'd find that acceptable (I personally wouldn't, but you may) if there's a chance to get things to actually be better and get an inventory system that works then I believe it should be made clear to BioWare that this is what you want.

After all, better than ME1's way of doing things doesn't mean it's automatically good. As far as I'm concerned it's not and it has to either go or get a lot more added to it to give it some proper depth, customisation and variation. Better or not, the ME2 system is still bad.

@Terror_K: i have read most of your posts and agree with what you are saying.  I too think ME2's 'inventory system' is way too simplistic in terms of weapons and weapon customization.  bring back weapon modding  - i.e. i have to choose whether i want incendiary ammo or armor piercing ammo, less recoil or more accuracy, etc.. - i know you get it but most of the ME2 defenders dont seem to.. give us more shotguns, pistols, and rifiles (i think they actually handled heavy weapons just fine), and the inventory system will be much improved.  that being said, i do like what they did with the N7 armor.  there are customization options here and also modification options.. its been a while since i played.. but from what i remember, you can choose the look of your armor, and whether you want to focus your bonuses to be weapon (and health too in think) focused or adept focused.  if i remember correcty, these options were available primarily on the upper body slots of the armor.. However, not being able to customize your DLC armor in the same manner was kind of a let down.

if they would have made these options a bit more prevelent in the game, and given us the ability to customize our DLC armor, i think it would have gone a long way to satisfying the inventory issues.  Beyond the inventory system though, i would have liked more skills.. 5 skills per character and 4 levels per skill (or around that.. again its been a while) is not really a level up system..

finally though, i would have been able to forgive them stripping (err.. removing) the RPG gameplay
system from the game if the main story was strong.  however, this was a big disappointment.  first off, what major choice was there in ME2 besides the upgrading of your ship?  in ME1, there was kaiden and ashley, there was wrex, there was the decision involving the rachni, etc. In ME2 there was the choice whether to upgrade your ship, the warehouse, upgrading your ship... and um.. oh yeah upgrading your ship..  In other words, not much..  Also the main enemy in ME2 was no where near as strong as in ME1, and the final boss fight was.... disappointing to say the least.  im not going to go into details because of spoilers, but i am pretty sure that all of us can agree - both ME2 supporters and critics - that ME1's ending - both in terms of gameplay and story - was WAAAAAYYYY better than ME2's.  for me that was the final nail in the coffin so to speak.  i understand ME2 is part of a trilogy, but so was Empire Strikes Back when it was released.. and Empire Strikes Back had a phenominal ending.

for me, that sums up my disappointments.. the lack of a real weapon inventory system (again the armor customization was good), the lack of compelling choices, and a terrible ending to ME2 all contributed to my overall evaluation.

edit:  hope that fixed the carriage return issues

Modifié par wrdnshprd, 07 septembre 2010 - 07:27 .

[bjdbwea]

Here's another disappointment: Letting customers download 1.5 GB full of zeros instead of the DLC they paid for. In my opinion, this shows once more how much BioWare has changed. Sure, things can go wrong sometimes. But something as simple as uploading a file and making sure it can properly be downloaded before making it public? If this is how BioWare does things these days, it's indeed no wonder that ME 2 turned out as it did.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 07 septembre 2010 - 07:40 .

[Lumikki]

wrdnshprd wrote...

@Terror_K: i have read most of your posts and agree with what you are saying.  I too think ME2's 'inventory system' is way too simplistic in terms of weapons and weapon customization.  bring back weapon modding  - i.e. i have to choose whether i want incendiary ammo or armor piercing ammo, less recoil or more accuracy, etc.. - i know you get it but most of the ME2 defenders dont seem to..

Actually we do understand it well. We aren't arguing at all should there be more customation, modification and "variety" like in ME1 had. We mostly argued the "base of inventory", not stuff what your and Terror_K here talks. So, argument isn't should it be there, but how it should be there. That's where our small disagrement exists.

[Tazzmission]

lotsb storyline was 100% better than the collectors story..... i still love me2 but bioware if your listening all i ask is that you continue what you are doing please make me3 follow what was mentioned in lotsb and you know what i am referring to

[Iakus]

bjdbwea wrote...

Here's another disappointment: Letting customers download 1.5 GB full of zeros instead of the DLC they paid for. In my opinion, this shows once more how much BioWare has changed. Sure, things can go wrong sometimes. But something as simple as uploading a file and making sure it can properly be downloaded before making it public? If this is how BioWare does things these days, it's indeed no wonder that ME 2 turned out as it did.

Guess I chose wisely to go with Witch Hunt and Golems of Amgarrak instead

[wrdnshprd]

Lumikki wrote...

wrdnshprd wrote...

@Terror_K: i have read most of your posts and agree with what you are saying.  I too think ME2's 'inventory system' is way too simplistic in terms of weapons and weapon customization.  bring back weapon modding  - i.e. i have to choose whether i want incendiary ammo or armor piercing ammo, less recoil or more accuracy, etc.. - i know you get it but most of the ME2 defenders dont seem to..

Actually we do understand it well. We aren't arguing at all should there be more customation, modification and "variety" like in ME1 had. We mostly argued the "base of inventory", not stuff what your and Terror_K here talks. So, argument isn't should it be there, but how it should be there. That's where our small disagrement exists.

understood   however there are some in this very thread that say upgrading is the same as modding. i.e. choosing whether i want to add incendiary rounds OR rapid fire to an assault rifle is the same as stacking stats to an assault rifle.  i say they arent.. one presents you with a decision you have to make, the other just upgrades your weapon..

Modifié par wrdnshprd, 07 septembre 2010 - 11:09 .

[CatatonicMan]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

No game would consider a simple, linear upgrade system as modding. It's NOT modding.

You modify, i.e. change, upgrade, your weapons. It is therefore weapon-modding. Whether you want to call it that is another thing entirely, but the upgrade system is just Mass Effect 2's particular representation of weapon-modding.

In the same way that I wouldn't call a telephone pole a tree, I wouldn't call a linear upgrade system 'modding'.

[Lumikki]

I don't think upgrading and modding is same, but they are not so far from each other. Upgrading is more like versions. While moding is more like change or addional function of something. Like adding function what wasn't in orginal situation. How ever, if you put the term very wide perspective then all of them are changed made in something.

Does ME2 has weapon modding? I don't think so, at least the way people here talk. Unless someone thinks upgrading and ammo powers are weapon modding. How ever, ME2 does have armor modding for Shepard.

I don't how ever know why people are arguing about this. No-one here is sayed that we should not have more customation, modding and variety in ME2. I have never seen anywhere people saying that game has too much customation or variety. Most arguments aren't should it be there, but how it should be done. because there is many ways to do same goals and some are better than others.

Modifié par Lumikki, 08 septembre 2010 - 12:05 .

[CatatonicMan]

How ever, ME2 does have armor modding for Shepard.

The armor modding is very limited and nearly useless, and even that is better than the weapon system. Go figure.

[FlyingWalrus]

CatatonicMan wrote...

Solaris Paradox wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

No game would consider a simple, linear upgrade system as modding. It's NOT modding.

You modify, i.e. change, upgrade, your weapons. It is therefore weapon-modding. Whether you want to call it that is another thing entirely, but the upgrade system is just Mass Effect 2's particular representation of weapon-modding.

In the same way that I wouldn't call a telephone pole a tree, I wouldn't call a linear upgrade system 'modding'.

You're going to upgrade linearly anyway, aren't you?

Let's face it, you're not going back from a Scram Rail X.

[CatatonicMan]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

You're going to upgrade linearly anyway, aren't you?

Let's face it, you're not going back from a Scram Rail X.

And this has what to do with anything? It certainly doesn't counter my argument in any way. 

ME1 is a hell of a lot more customizable than ME2, but I don't recall ever saying that it didn't have its own customization issues. In fact, the ME1 customization system was one of the aspects Bioware had a golden opportunity to improve and expand upon for ME2; instead, they put it out with the garbage along with the other game aspects that were easier to scrap rather than perfect.

[FlyingWalrus]

I'm just saying.

Once you install a better barrel on your gun, you're probably not going back. ME1 and ME2's "weapon upgrades" both work equally well to me, except the latter doesn't have me sifting through the refuse every thirty minutes.

I'd rather see something more robust and modular in ME3, and I'm sure we will. ME2 was built off of an entirely restructured engine, so some of the simplifications were justifiable seeing how they probably had to do twice the work in half the time taken for ME1. They're taking their sweet time on ME3.

[Revan312]

Well, after playing LotSB, I must say, that was a great piece of entertainment from a story perspective. I actually engaged with the characters and cared what happened.. something that never happened in the base game.. So that at least gave me some hope on the writing direction, hopefully they stick with that style in ME3 and move away from the overly bombastic style riddled throughout the main game.



Great "camera" angles, visuals, action that isn't super straight forward, characterization of even the newly introduced and above all, a good amount of well done and fairly deep dialogue.. It just made me wish that when I got back to the Normandy the rest of the game world would be like that DLC *sigh*



Oh well, overall that did get me a bit more jazzed for the coming content and ME3 and helped to quell, at least for the moment, my discomfort with the direction the game went..