10273 réponses à ce sujet

[SkullandBonesmember]

uberdowzen wrote...

No, I'm saying that if you can cope with ME1 combat on normal or above, you can cope with ME2 combat.

No I can't and I've explained why before.

[tonnactus]

uberdowzen wrote...


But what about the hundreds of other potential armor upgraded that could potentially change the way the game plays? Oh yeah, that's right only medical exoskeletons are actually useful.

Upgrades that increase damage protection,like energy plates,are usefull.Upgrades that improve mobile accuracy are incredible usefull for teammates. Combat exoskleletons are also usefull because they improve biotic protection,shorten the duration you are affected by biotic powers.

[tonnactus]

Unit-Alpha wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

This

2 million copies in stores doesnt mean so much copies where actually sold to customers.

Umm... ME2 SOLD 2 million units in the first week. Google it.

Shiped is not the same als sold.Some news misinterpreted this.

[tonnactus]

uberdowzen wrote...

Dumbed down is an off term. The combat is now more fun, requires greater precision, requires you to think more about which powers you use (whereas in ME1 you could pretty much use which ever one you wanted to the same affect) and requires you to use more squad coordination.

The user crucial make a whole compilation of insanity solo videos with all classes that Mass Effect had....
So "required" is the wrong word.

[tonnactus]

uberdowzen wrote...


Is the other reason less dialogue? Because I'm playing ME1 right now, and there isn't any less (I think overall there's actually slightly more companion dialogue.

Discussing the dialogue.In the amount,Mass Effect 2 had more dialogue.

But when it comes to a single npc/squadmember it seems:

Mass Effect: One investigation option,7-10 sentences

Mass Effect 2:One investigation,2-5 sentences

[uberdowzen]

tonnactus wrote...

And in this case they are right. Instead of improving the ai they remove crouch. Do you really think this is a good "solution"?
Its just a very cheap one that restrict the gameplay.
And the cover system isnt good in Mass Effect 2.Accidently get suck in cover when sprinting,  jumping over it sometimes.
This should be better then in the first game??Hell,no.

It wasn't just the AI. The camera thing that the player could do in ME1 wasn't something that could be fixed with improved AI, it was something that would require them to incorporate some kind of system where every enemy in the game had there own virtual camera or something.

And the new cover system is much better than randomly getting sucked towards cover like in ME1.

[uberdowzen]

tonnactus wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...


But what about the hundreds of other potential armor upgraded that could potentially change the way the game plays? Oh yeah, that's right only medical exoskeletons are actually useful.

Upgrades that increase damage protection,like energy plates,are usefull.Upgrades that improve mobile accuracy are incredible usefull for teammates. Combat exoskleletons are also usefull because they improve biotic protection,shorten the duration you are affected by biotic powers.

And yet when it comes down to it, they make no difference.

[uberdowzen]

tonnactus wrote...

Unit-Alpha wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

This

2 million copies in stores doesnt mean so much copies where actually sold to customers.

Umm... ME2 SOLD 2 million units in the first week. Google it.

Shiped is not the same als sold.Some news misinterpreted this.

No, EA actually said at the end of the first week that they sold 2 million units, not shipped. Check Wikipedia

[uberdowzen]

tonnactus wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

Dumbed down is an off term. The combat is now more fun, requires greater precision, requires you to think more about which powers you use (whereas in ME1 you could pretty much use which ever one you wanted to the same affect) and requires you to use more squad coordination.

The user crucial make a whole compilation of insanity solo videos with all classes that Mass Effect had....
So "required" is the wrong word.

Huh?

[uberdowzen]

tonnactus wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...


Is the other reason less dialogue? Because I'm playing ME1 right now, and there isn't any less (I think overall there's actually slightly more companion dialogue.

Discussing the dialogue.In the amount,Mass Effect 2 had more dialogue.

But when it comes to a single npc/squadmember it seems:

Mass Effect: One investigation option,7-10 sentences

Mass Effect 2:One investigation,2-5 sentences

2-5 sentences? That doesn't sound right. Also, it's the quality of the dialogue and how cinematically they act it out rather than just quality.

[tonnactus]

uberdowzen wrote...


Huh?

Just look:


Mass Effect 2 without squadmates,different locations.

[uberdowzen]

tonnactus wrote...

Just look:


Mass Effect 2 without squadmates,different locations.

OK, requires is the wrong word. But 2 things, 1) It does put a greater emphasis on squad coordination and 2) how was ME1 any different? I think I could get through most of that game without a squad. I might actually do better.

[TJSolo]

uberdowzen wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

Just look:


Mass Effect 2 without squadmates,different locations.

OK, requires is the wrong word. But 2 things, 1) It does put a greater emphasis on squad coordination and 2) how was ME1 any different? I think I could get through most of that game without a squad. I might actually do better.

Oh first you can't see how ME2 squadless without proof but now can EASILY think of how ME1 can function without a squad, no proof needed.
Wow, so dismissive of others facts but your self assumptions are easily more plausible.
Make a vid of your "squadless" examples for ME1 to prove how viable it is.

[SithLordExarKun]

Terror_K wrote...


ME2 was a worse RPG than ME1. Whether it was a worse game full-stop is another matter.

And ME1 was a horrible RPG to begin with.

Modifié par SithLordExarKun, 08 mai 2010 - 03:32 .

[Darth Drago]

Swiped this from uberdowzen’s post a page or two back, not sure where he found it.

Brenon Holmes, Bioware Programmer

We generally found that people
would crouch a few meters behind cover and shoot over the cover (because
of some camera tricks, this was possible), instead of actually using
the cover.

It made it hard for the AIs to fight back since they didn't have access
to the same camera tricks.

We looked into why people weren't using cover... especially since we
were making a lot of improvements to the system and we really wanted
people to take advantage of them.

A lot of it had to do with responsiveness, ease of use and a whole mess
of small issues that simply meant that cover was not very satisfying to
use.

So, we fixed up most of those issues and it's now miles better than it
was before. A very satisfying experience overall.

Additionally, in ME1 we weren't really familiar with the idea of combat
spaces, it being a new type of gameplay for us. So you had a lot of
situations where you'd be out in the open - using crouch to decrease
your profile was a pretty natural thing to do.

This time around we've made a lot of improvements to the combat
environments... so you don't really find yourself in situations where
you're out in the open and need to reduce your profile while you take
some shots. Or if you do, there's generally cover near by... since the
environment has been set up for it.

Hopefully that clears it up a bit?

-So in short, instead of fixing the enemy AI to do something like react to being shot at or even reacting to your position, their solution is to just remove the crouch? Yea, that make the game so much better. We now are penalized for playing smart. Ask any soldier or police officer and I’ll bet they will say the best way to engage in combat would be to exploit your environment to take the safest shot.

Combat environment improvements? Really, is that what they call it? Barriers that fold up conveniently in front of you to give you something to hide behind, painfully obvious shooter arena level designs and levels that really don’t give you any freedom of movement beyond the narrow corridor layout.

Sounds like they just loved taking the quick fix route in ME2 by just removing game elements completely instead of fixing the problems in the first place.

[uberdowzen]

TJSolo wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

tonnactus wrote...

Just look:


Mass Effect 2 without squadmates,different locations.

OK, requires is the wrong word. But 2 things, 1) It does put a greater emphasis on squad coordination and 2) how was ME1 any different? I think I could get through most of that game without a squad. I might actually do better.

Oh first you can't see how ME2 squadless without proof but now can EASILY think of how ME1 can function without a squad, no proof needed.
Wow, so dismissive of others facts but your self assumptions are easily more plausible.
Make a vid of your "squadless" examples for ME1 to prove how viable it is.

Um, I might be contracting some kind of disease which inhibits my short term memory but I don't recall ever asking for proof that it's possible to do parts of ME2 without companions. I'm not sure I ever said that you couldn't (I did use the word required earlier, but that was a mistake). If you're referring to my response that said "Huh?" that was because I didn't understand what had been written.

My point was more that in ME2 there's actually a purpose to having companions (you'll notice in the video it's taking him quite a while to deal with the attack) and coordinating with them creates some cool new tactics.

[uberdowzen]

Darth Drago wrote...

-So in short, instead of fixing the enemy AI to do something like react to being shot at or even reacting to your position, their solution is to just remove the crouch? Yea, that make the game so much better. We now are penalized for playing smart. Ask any soldier or police officer and I’ll bet they will say the best way to engage in combat would be to exploit your environment to take the safest shot.

Combat environment improvements? Really, is that what they call it? Barriers that fold up conveniently in front of you to give you something to hide behind, painfully obvious shooter arena level designs and levels that really don’t give you any freedom of movement beyond the narrow corridor layout.

Sounds like they just loved taking the quick fix route in ME2 by just removing game elements completely instead of fixing the problems in the first place.

http://forum.teamxbo...ad.php?t=629081

Not the first place I'd read this, but that's where I read it this morning.

I have to take issue with what you say there. The way I read that I got the feeling it was more of an exploit than a realistic tactic. It's not possible to "fix" the AI as it's not because the AI isn't smart enough, it's because the AIs aren't players, who can utilize the same camera trick. And in my whole playthrough of ME1 (which I'm wrapping up now) I haven't used crouch once.

The issue they were dealing with is that often some environments don't have cover. That's not great in a cover based shooter.

[Darth Drago]

uberdowzen wrote...

@ Darth Drago, So it's like a TV series, rather than a movie.

I think it would be best to stick with the book full of short stories perspective example. Its simpler that way.

(this is a reply to about how ME2 is nothing but a collection of short stories posting a few pages back if anyone is interested) http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/1472797/50#2530502

Modifié par Darth Drago, 08 mai 2010 - 06:07 .

[Darth Drago]

uberdowzen wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

-So in short, instead of fixing the enemy AI to do something like react to being shot at or even reacting to your position, their solution is to just remove the crouch? Yea, that make the game so much better. We now are penalized for playing smart. Ask any soldier or police officer and I’ll bet they will say the best way to engage in combat would be to exploit your environment to take the safest shot.

Combat environment improvements? Really, is that what they call it? Barriers that fold up conveniently in front of you to give you something to hide behind, painfully obvious shooter arena level designs and levels that really don’t give you any freedom of movement beyond the narrow corridor layout.

Sounds like they just loved taking the quick fix route in ME2 by just removing game elements completely instead of fixing the problems in the first place.

http://forum.teamxbo...ad.php?t=629081

Not the first place I'd read this, but that's where I read it this morning.

I have to take issue with what you say there. The way I read that I got the feeling it was more of an exploit than a realistic tactic. It's not possible to "fix" the AI as it's not because the AI isn't smart enough, it's because the AIs aren't players, who can utilize the same camera trick. And in my whole playthrough of ME1 (which I'm wrapping up now) I haven't used crouch once.

The issue they were dealing with is that often some environments don't have cover. That's not great in a cover based shooter.

-I use crouch a lot of times in my ME1 games. It does seem to have an effect on aiming with a sniper rifle when its skill is fairly low.

There are a few spots in ME1 where the AI is rather stupid and the game has exploits you can use. Take the Geth Armature you fight before going into the area Liara is. If you just go behind the wall to the left, there is a spot where you can shoot at it between the cracks and it will completely ignore or actually tries to shoot but cant hit you because of the wall and it actually just stands there. That’s just bad programming since it should react to either getting shot at and/or your location and move accordingly. I
**Take note on what I just said there. It was a hit against ME1.**

If its an exploit in the game then it still needs to be fixed, not just ignored or with a quick fix by removing an element that player may use.

But to have to much cover that’s also way to obvious and set up in a way that mimics player vs. player arena maps isn’t good either. In ME2 there isn’t enough open areas to actually worry about. A few outside levels and larger interiors with little cover choices would have been nice just to change up the pace. Halo 3 ODST gave you natural cover in the game but the levels weren’t cover heavy with things to hide behind every 10 feet in the game.

Modifié par Darth Drago, 08 mai 2010 - 05:44 .

[lukandroll]

uberdowzen wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

-So in short, instead of fixing the enemy AI to do something like react to being shot at or even reacting to your position, their solution is to just remove the crouch? Yea, that make the game so much better. We now are penalized for playing smart. Ask any soldier or police officer and I’ll bet they will say the best way to engage in combat would be to exploit your environment to take the safest shot.

Combat environment improvements? Really, is that what they call it? Barriers that fold up conveniently in front of you to give you something to hide behind, painfully obvious shooter arena level designs and levels that really don’t give you any freedom of movement beyond the narrow corridor layout.

Sounds like they just loved taking the quick fix route in ME2 by just removing game elements completely instead of fixing the problems in the first place.

http://forum.teamxbo...ad.php?t=629081

Not the first place I'd read this, but that's where I read it this morning.

I have to take issue with what you say there. The way I read that I got the feeling it was more of an exploit than a realistic tactic. It's not possible to "fix" the AI as it's not because the AI isn't smart enough, it's because the AIs aren't players, who can utilize the same camera trick. And in my whole playthrough of ME1 (which I'm wrapping up now) I haven't used crouch once.

The issue they were dealing with is that often some environments don't have cover. That's not great in a cover based shooter.

Oh come on, did you really believe that? don't be naive... they don't give a rat ass about fixing the problem, they decided to scrap the whole thing for money and time issues, to rush the game to a almost impossible release date.

The game isn't fixed, and even worse, its became more predictable because of this quick fix....
Anytime I see some boxes, or boulders on the ground, I allready know there a fight ahead... 

[bjdbwea]

Darth Drago wrote...

Sounds like they just loved taking the quick fix route in ME2 by just removing game elements completely instead of fixing the problems in the first place.

That about sums it up. And of course it's only fortuitous that it allowed them to push the game out of the door much earlier than if they had attempted to actually fix anything.

[uberdowzen]

How was the game rushed? It was in development for 2 and a half years on a existing base.

[Massadonious1]

It was rushed becuse it sucks, apparently.

[uberdowzen]

Darth Drago wrote...

uberdowzen wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...

-So in short, instead of fixing the enemy AI to do something like react to being shot at or even reacting to your position, their solution is to just remove the crouch? Yea, that make the game so much better. We now are penalized for playing smart. Ask any soldier or police officer and I’ll bet they will say the best way to engage in combat would be to exploit your environment to take the safest shot.

Combat environment improvements? Really, is that what they call it? Barriers that fold up conveniently in front of you to give you something to hide behind, painfully obvious shooter arena level designs and levels that really don’t give you any freedom of movement beyond the narrow corridor layout.

Sounds like they just loved taking the quick fix route in ME2 by just removing game elements completely instead of fixing the problems in the first place.

http://forum.teamxbo...ad.php?t=629081

Not the first place I'd read this, but that's where I read it this morning.

I have to take issue with what you say there. The way I read that I got the feeling it was more of an exploit than a realistic tactic. It's not possible to "fix" the AI as it's not because the AI isn't smart enough, it's because the AIs aren't players, who can utilize the same camera trick. And in my whole playthrough of ME1 (which I'm wrapping up now) I haven't used crouch once.

The issue they were dealing with is that often some environments don't have cover. That's not great in a cover based shooter.

-I use crouch a lot of times in my ME1 games. It does seem to have an effect on aiming with a sniper rifle when its skill is fairly low.

There are a few spots in ME1 where the AI is rather stupid and the game has exploits you can use. Take the Geth Armature you fight before going into the area Liara is. If you just go behind the wall to the left, there is a spot where you can shoot at it between the cracks and it will completely ignore or actually tries to shoot but cant hit you because of the wall and it actually just stands there. That’s just bad programming since it should react to either getting shot at and/or your location and move accordingly. I
**Take note on what I just said there. It was a hit against ME1.**

If its an exploit in the game then it still needs to be fixed, not just ignored or with a quick fix by removing an element that player may use.

But to have to much cover that’s also way to obvious and set up in a way that mimics player vs. player arena maps isn’t good either. In ME2 there isn’t enough open areas to actually worry about. A few outside levels and larger interiors with little cover choices would have been nice just to change up the pace. Halo 3 ODST gave you natural cover in the game but the levels weren’t cover heavy with things to hide behind every 10 feet in the game.

Yes, it does increase accuracy (especially important for Soldiers and Infiltrators) which is probably why I used it very little as a Vanguard.

The part with the armature you mentioned, that's the only way I really been able to beat that part.

How would you fix the issue? I don't think removing crouch was a quick fix (with the amount of work that went into ME2's cover system, I'd say it was far from it). I don't think this was a case of "we could spend a month fixing the AI or a day removing crouch", I suspect that it was the only fix.

I definitly agree that the cover needs to be better implemented into the environment though.

[bjdbwea]

I thought that was obvious. Why can I configure vehicle controls, if there is no vehicle in the main game? Answer: It was meant to be part of it, but the game was rushed out of the door before it was finished. What about the two add-on characters? Everything indicates that they, too, were meant to be part of the main game, but not finished in time. Apart from that, there are cut corners everywhere. Can you really not see that? The end result isn't as disappointing as KotoR 2 was for example, but it's also nowhere nearly as finished and polished as ME 1 was.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 08 mai 2010 - 07:08 .