10273 réponses à ce sujet

[SkullandBonesmember]

KitsuneRommel wrote...

While I think the combat in ME2 is >>>>>>>>> better than in ME1 some missions have too much of it.

At least you can admit it unlike others.

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

The combat in ME1 was fine, and even enjoyable, even on Veteran.

You're right, the combat in ME1 is fine and enjoyable but I'm playing a Vanguard right now and this is how most of the combat goes:

• Run into enemies, draw weapons.
• Use my 5 offensive powers (Barrier, Carnage, Throw, Lift and Warp).
• Shoot my shotgun a bit (no real limit to how much I can shoot as it cools down to basically zero during the shooting animation.
• Get Paralyzed by enemy biotics. Rag doll poorly on the ground while my team mates hover around me and get slaughtered.
• Try to use my powers but realise none of them have cooled down.
• [Optional] Get hit by sniper, instant death, return to step 1.
• Finish off the remaining enemies with shotgun.
• Powers finish recharging.

The combat is fairly fun, but it just isn't that great compared to ME2s.

[tonnactus]

Enemy biotics?Damping.Or disable them before they got you with your own biotics.
At least this is better instead of the warp spamming all "biotic" enemies did in the sequel.If you want that biotics are a challenge(a little) of course.

Cooldown is never an issue for a vanguard thanks to adrenaline rush.

Modifié par tonnactus, 03 mai 2010 - 11:28 .

[uberdowzen]

tonnactus wrote...

Enemy biotics?Damping.Or disable them before they got you with your own biotics.
At least this is better instead of the warp spamming all "biotic" enemies did in the sequel.If you want that biotics are a challenge(a little) of course.

Cooldown is never an issue for a vanguard thanks to adrenaline rush.

So you actually think that individual cooldowns work better than the universal cooldown? Universal Cooldowns encourage teamwork and are less confusing (not that individual cooldowns were that confusing but in ME2 you can keep your eyes firmly on the crosshair because of the cooldown meter there.

Also sorry for nitpicking but adrenaline rush is ME2, it's adrenaline burst ine ME1.

Modifié par uberdowzen, 03 mai 2010 - 11:34 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

So you actually think that individual cooldowns work better than the universal cooldown? Universal Cooldowns encourage teamwork and are less confusing (not that individual cooldowns were that confusing but in ME2 you can keep your eyes firmly on the crosshair because of the cooldown meter there.

Also sorry for nitpicking but adrenaline rush is ME2, it's adrenaline burst ine ME1.

Oh yeah! Having to resort to tactics is awesome.

And I don't know how you think combat in ME1, or ME2 for that matter could be "confusing".

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 03 mai 2010 - 11:41 .

[RyrineaNara]

Mass Effect 1 Combat isn't confusing, and I still had to do tactics in Mass Effect 1. I still don't get how people don't use tactics in Mass Effect 1.

[tonnactus]

uberdowzen wrote...

]

So you actually think that individual cooldowns work better than the universal cooldown? Universal Cooldowns encourage teamwork and are less confusing (not that individual cooldowns were that confusing but in ME2 you can keep your eyes firmly on the crosshair because of the cooldown meter there.

I still dont understand(i am a console player like you seems to be) why they didnt put the talent symbols at the top of the screen like in the pc version of both games.So you could always see what power cooled down and could be used again.
You yourself call a example where teamwork could be usefull(enemy biotics).And to be honest,you dont really need your team in Mass Effect 2 anyway.
I did the collector ship on insanity with tali and jacob.A lot of people would say that this are some of the weakest teammembers you could take in general.I didnt have any problems.(as an adept)

[tonnactus]

RyrineaNara wrote...

Mass Effect 1 Combat isn't confusing, and I still had to do tactics in Mass Effect 1. I still don't get how people don't use tactics in Mass Effect 1.

Those people take a pure combat team in early stages to matriarch benezia/krogan battlemaster on therum and then complain how hard the battle is.

Modifié par tonnactus, 03 mai 2010 - 11:51 .

[RyrineaNara]

tonnactus wrote...

RyrineaNara wrote...

Mass Effect 1 Combat isn't confusing, and I still had to do tactics in Mass Effect 1. I still don't get how people don't use tactics in Mass Effect 1.

Those people take a pure combat team in early stages to matriarch benezia/krogan battlemaster on therum and then complain how hard the battle is.

This is true.  But I mostly play with biotics.  During Benzia and the battlemaster I had to use a lot of tactices in order for me to win that battle/

Modifié par RyrineaNara, 04 mai 2010 - 12:03 .

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

So you actually think that individual cooldowns work better than the universal cooldown? Universal Cooldowns encourage teamwork and are less confusing (not that individual cooldowns were that confusing but in ME2 you can keep your eyes firmly on the crosshair because of the cooldown meter there.

Also sorry for nitpicking but adrenaline rush is ME2, it's adrenaline burst ine ME1.

Oh yeah! Having to resort to tactics is awesome.

And I don't know how you think combat in ME1, or ME2 for that matter could be "confusing".

Yes, using tactics is awesome. It friggin' RPG combat, the whole idea is that it's tactical.

I'm not saying ME1 combat is confusing (probably the wrong choice of words) I meant more that I like being able to keep my eyes on the crosshair rather than having to dart up to the quick bar every 5 seconds.

[uberdowzen]

tonnactus wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

So you actually think that individual cooldowns work better than the universal cooldown? Universal Cooldowns encourage teamwork and are less confusing (not that individual cooldowns were that confusing but in ME2 you can keep your eyes firmly on the crosshair because of the cooldown meter there.

I still dont understand(i am a console player like you seems to be) why they didnt put the talent symbols at the top of the screen like in the pc version of both games.So you could always see what power cooled down and could be used again.
You yourself call a example where teamwork could be usefull(enemy biotics).And to be honest,you dont really need your team in Mass Effect 2 anyway.
I did the collector ship on insanity with tali and jacob.A lot of people would say that this are some of the weakest teammembers you could take in general.I didnt have any problems.(as an adept)

Nope playing on PC (you can check in my profile). My issue was that you have to take your eyes off the action to check the quick slots. It's not much of an issue but it's still annoying.

What was the teamwork I said you had to use with enemy biotics?

I said earlier that you do need to use your team in ME2, for situations like I use lift and then someone else uses pull.

[SkullandBonesmember]

RyrineaNara wrote...

Mass Effect 1 Combat isn't confusing, and I still had to do tactics in Mass Effect 1. I still don't get how people don't use tactics in Mass Effect 1.

Literally all I have to do in ME1 is duck behind cover, use my party's and own skills(almost always the same regardless who is in my party), and wait until all the enemies are dead. Very rarely did my guns overheat. It's a lot more complicated in ME2. You have to take into account the 8 individual enemies firing at you from in front, charging you from the sides, and sneaking up behind you. Oh but it doesn't end there. Unlike in ME1, you don't get 20 enemies and that's it. In ME2 you get 20 enemies, and after you take care of them thinking it's over, another 20 enemies appear. And after defeating that horde of 20 enemies, it still has yet to be over because there's one final horde of 20 enemies you need to kill. All this while NOT being boss battles. The sad thing is, I have an easier time with the bosses compared to non boss encounters. The stress isn't over yet. Oh no, no, no. We have to keep an eye on our limited ammo. And to top it off, it gets so frustrating when even a level 30 Infiltrator can't make a dent into the extremely long time it takes to win a fight.

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

Yes, using tactics is awesome. It friggin' RPG combat, the whole idea is that it's tactical.

Read my above post.

I'm fine with real time combat, as long as such combat takes a page out of Fallout 3 or ME1's book.

[Dudeman315]

uberdowzen wrote...
Nope playing on PC (you can check in my profile). My issue was that you have to take your eyes off the action to check the quick slots. It's not much of an issue but it's still annoying.

What was the teamwork I said you had to use with enemy biotics?

I said earlier that you do need to use your team in ME2, for situations like I use lift and then someone else uses pull.

But it mostly doesn't matter because either your party is dead( unity slows down cooldown for incinerate) or they run around fine and kill everything without your control.

On Insanity my party was dead 90%+ of the time, and insome cases like the last room of the IFF mission made it easier.

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

Yes, using tactics is awesome. It friggin' RPG combat, the whole idea is that it's tactical.

Read my above post.

I'm fine with real time combat, as long as such combat takes a page out of Fallout 3 or ME1's book.

So essentially you want no challenge at all?

[uberdowzen]

Dudeman315 wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...
Nope playing on PC (you can check in my profile). My issue was that you have to take your eyes off the action to check the quick slots. It's not much of an issue but it's still annoying.

What was the teamwork I said you had to use with enemy biotics?

I said earlier that you do need to use your team in ME2, for situations like I use lift and then someone else uses pull.

But it mostly doesn't matter because either your party is dead( unity slows down cooldown for incinerate) or they run around fine and kill everything without your control.

On Insanity my party was dead 90%+ of the time, and insome cases like the last room of the IFF mission made it easier.

Are you telling your squad to take cover? Also how is this any different than ME1? I can't count the number of times my squad has got slaughtered (at veteran) and I've had to finish up.

[TJSolo]

uberdowzen wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

Yes, using tactics is awesome. It friggin' RPG combat, the whole idea is that it's tactical.

Read my above post.

I'm fine with real time combat, as long as such combat takes a page out of Fallout 3 or ME1's book.

So essentially you want no challenge at all?

No challenge, it what you got out of reading?
Looks to me he wants combat that doesn't use a mandatory cover system linked to respawn points. Also the psuedo-exhilaration people say they get from ammo he actually feels a bit of duress from it.

[uberdowzen]

TJSolo wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

Yes, using tactics is awesome. It friggin' RPG combat, the whole idea is that it's tactical.

Read my above post.

I'm fine with real time combat, as long as such combat takes a page out of Fallout 3 or ME1's book.

So essentially you want no challenge at all?

No challenge, it what you got out of reading?
Looks to me he wants combat that doesn't use a mandatory cover system linked to respawn points. Also the psuedo-exhilaration people say they get from ammo he actually feels a bit of duress from it.

Unless I've misunderstood, he says he wants the combat to be like it was at casual in ME1, duck behind cover, spam power buttons, shoot until everything is dead. That sounds to me like no challenge at all.

[TJSolo]

Must be some kind of interpretation error. He states he plays ME2 on casual but the difficulty range Skull is talking about for ME1 is casual-veteran.

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

So essentially you want no challenge at all?

Wow, you must not read my posts. I'm not against a "challenge". Combat in certain video games can be fun. Like Prince of Persia, ME1, and Fallout 3. While the combat was really cool, I no longer play the latter, having sold it, because the story suffered greatly. There was no emphasis on it. Prince Of Persia gave appropriate optional degrees of difficulty. So did Fallout 3. And of course ME1, and I purchased ME2 believing the appropriate optional degrees of difficulty would be implemented in the sequel as well. Do you remember a few posts back I said I've played veteran in ME1? Probably not, but I did and it was fine. The story in ME1 didn't suffer because I had the difficulty cranked to veteran. On casual and normal, to do a completionist playthrough, it took me 32-34 hours. On veteran it took me 36. I was content with that.

So if you're asking if I want no challenge if it means the story will take a back seat in terms of ratio to the plot, no, I don't want a challenge.

[Dudeman315]

uberdowzen wrote...

Dudeman315 wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...
Nope playing on PC (you can check in my profile). My issue was that you have to take your eyes off the action to check the quick slots. It's not much of an issue but it's still annoying.

What was the teamwork I said you had to use with enemy biotics?

I said earlier that you do need to use your team in ME2, for situations like I use lift and then someone else uses pull.

But it mostly doesn't matter because either your party is dead( unity slows down cooldown for incinerate) or they run around fine and kill everything without your control.

On Insanity my party was dead 90%+ of the time, and insome cases like the last room of the IFF mission made it easier.

Are you telling your squad to take cover? Also how is this any different than ME1? I can't count the number of times my squad has got slaughtered (at veteran) and I've had to finish up.

Yes I tell my squad to take cover which they do until they deside not to and I end up spending 90% of the fight micromanaging my squad because they won't stay still, or deceide to climb on top of the cover that they are supposed to be behind.
It's different because I can still use my other powers right before and right after unity, and my party rarly dies in ME1 ( I run with Wrex + Tali), but I EQUIP them to survive in me1(no way to up their armor or sheild max or regen rates etc. in ME2.)

[Kileyan]

uberdowzen wrote...

So you actually think that individual cooldowns work better than the universal cooldown? Universal Cooldowns encourage teamwork and are less confusing (not that individual cooldowns were that confusing but in ME2 you can keep your eyes firmly on the crosshair because of the cooldown meter there.

Also sorry for nitpicking but adrenaline rush is ME2, it's adrenaline burst ine ME1.

yes I do think individual cool downs are a better game mechanic. Less confusing isn't a reason to do otherwise. If a person cannot figure out 3 or 4 cooldowns they are just bad players. I do not mean they shouldn't be allowed to play the game if they can't use more than one cooldown, I mean they have the perfectly viable option to hit a key, pause the game, bring up the power wheel and figure out what to do when overwhelmed with the choice to use more than one power.

I know Bioware meant to make every skill usable, very often, but all they accomplished was someome using the same skill over and over.  Most every insanity vid I've ever seen is someone totally max invested in one skill, they hide behind cover and use it over and over. There is little reason to use any other skills since they only max out a few, and all are on the same timer.

Maybe I am overly simplifying things, but from what I have seen, everyone picks a favorite power to max and uses it over and over from cover. The only variation is they sometimes use a secondary power for specific husk encounters. The gameplay is almost exactly the same from beginning to end. Shared timers didn't encourage to use of powers, they just encouranged the use of mostly a single maxed power.

Hey ME2 was still great fun. I hope the 3rd installment will find the middle ground

[SkullandBonesmember]

Let me just add uberdowzen when Bioware says a difficulty is for the fans that prefer the plot, I expect them to mean it.

[Dudeman315]

Kileyan wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

So you actually think that individual cooldowns work better than the universal cooldown? Universal Cooldowns encourage teamwork and are less confusing (not that individual cooldowns were that confusing but in ME2 you can keep your eyes firmly on the crosshair because of the cooldown meter there.

Also sorry for nitpicking but adrenaline rush is ME2, it's adrenaline burst ine ME1.

yes I do think individual cool downs are a better game mechanic. Less confusing isn't a reason to do otherwise. If a person cannot figure out 3 or 4 cooldowns they are just bad players. I do not mean they shouldn't be allowed to play the game if they can't use more than one cooldown, I mean they have the perfectly viable option to hit a key, pause the game, bring up the power wheel and figure out what to do when overwhelmed with the choice to use more than one power.

I know Bioware meant to make every skill usable, very often, but all they accomplished was someome using the same skill over and over.  Most every insanity vid I've ever seen is someone totally max invested in one skill, they hide behind cover and use it over and over. There is little reason to use any other skills since they only max out a few, and all are on the same timer.

Maybe I am overly simplifying things, but from what I have seen, everyone picks a favorite power to max and uses it over and over from cover. The only variation is they sometimes use a secondary power for specific husk encounters. The gameplay is almost exactly the same from beginning to end. Shared timers didn't encourage to use of powers, they just encouranged the use of mostly a single maxed power.

What she/he said--except to add that vangaurds just charge things instead of hide but yes, one power forever!

[uberdowzen]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

So essentially you want no challenge at all?

Wow, you must not read my posts. I'm not against a "challenge". Combat in certain video games can be fun. Like Prince of Persia, ME1, and Fallout 3. While the combat was really cool, I no longer play the latter, having sold it, because the story suffered greatly. There was no emphasis on it. Prince Of Persia gave appropriate optional degrees of difficulty. So did Fallout 3. And of course ME1, and I purchased ME2 believing the appropriate optional degrees of difficulty would be implemented in the sequel as well. Do you remember a few posts back I said I've played veteran in ME1? Probably not, but I did and it was fine. The story in ME1 didn't suffer because I had the difficulty cranked to veteran. On casual and normal, to do a completionist playthrough, it took me 32-34 hours. On veteran it took me 36. I was content with that.

So if you're asking if I want no challenge if it means the story will take a back seat in terms of ratio to the plot, no, I don't want a challenge.

I disagree. A good plot is great, but I am not going to play through an unchallenging game to experience it. Why not just go watch movie? I do agree that casual in ME2 may be a bit hard for players just wanting to experience the plot but you also imply that the combat in ME1 is better than ME2s which it just isn't. ME1's may be easier at lower levels but ME2 does everything else better.