133 réponses à ce sujet

[Braag]

I support the decision BW made. Reloading adds little something to the game. I have to actually take cover and reload while in the 1st game I just held left mouse button down and aimed at everything that moved with my Assault Rifle and waited for them to die. It was boring to say the least.

And with Frictionless Materials my weapon never overheated anyway...

[Kileyan]

Braag wrote...

I support the decision BW made. Reloading adds little something to the game. I have to actually take cover and reload while in the 1st game I just held left mouse button down and aimed at everything that moved with my Assault Rifle and waited for them to die. It was boring to say the least.
And with Frictionless Materials my weapon never overheated anyway...

Taking cover in this game is not a tactical decision, is it something you do because enemies don't miss and cover is littered around every board, every 5 steps. Reloading isn't a tactical decision either, the animatiion is so quick that it becomes a reflexive button push every several shots, not an important decision.

I don't mind the ammo or the reloading, I only mind the ammo limits that mirror popular generic shooter games, rather than a real tactical simulation. But don't stretch the reloading animation into more than it is. Its so quick it is barely more than a blip in your routine as you hide behind a waist high concrete barrier, that is on every map. I mean its cool and all, watching Shep eject a mag every few seconds, but hardly makes the game tactical.

Not picking on you, but your last sentence drives me nuts, because everyone says it! Why remove all the cool weapons mods, why not just adjust or remove the frictionless materials! Balance the game around a spray and pray no overheat gun or a strong hard hitting make every shot count gun. Why remove all customization because of one stupidly balanced mod.

Heck thats the way the whole game design went down:

Frictionless made guns fire forever-remove all customization

People didn't like the crappy handling of the mako and steep cliffs-remove all planet exploration

People found the inventory very clunky-remove inventory

*sad face here* where is the middle ground

Modifié par Kileyan, 13 mars 2010 - 04:16 .

[mispelinsuks]

I can see how all these changes happened . EA: So Bioware lets talk about this Mass Effect game you've got going on . Bioware : Ok whats up ? EA: Can you dumb it down a little...the mainstream casual gamers and us just don't get it. Bioware : Palm to face.

Modifié par mispelinsuks, 13 mars 2010 - 04:59 .

[binaryemperor]

EA: Oh, and screw up the PC version so that they have to get squad mates in the same limitation the Xbox had to. You know, the whole 2 disk thing. Chao.

[Braag]

Kileyan wrote...

Braag wrote...

I support the decision BW made. Reloading adds little something to the game. I have to actually take cover and reload while in the 1st game I just held left mouse button down and aimed at everything that moved with my Assault Rifle and waited for them to die. It was boring to say the least.
And with Frictionless Materials my weapon never overheated anyway...

Taking cover in this game is not a tactical decision, is it something you do because enemies don't miss and cover is littered around every board, every 5 steps. Reloading isn't a tactical decision either, the animatiion is so quick that it becomes a reflexive button push every several shots, not an important decision.

I don't mind the ammo or the reloading, I only mind the ammo limits that mirror popular generic shooter games, rather than a real tactical simulation. But don't stretch the reloading animation into more than it is. Its so quick it is barely more than a blip in your routine as you hide behind a waist high concrete barrier, that is on every map. I mean its cool and all, watching Shep eject a mag every few seconds, but hardly makes the game tactical.

Not picking on you, but your last sentence drives me nuts, because everyone says it! Why remove all the cool weapons mods, why not just adjust or remove the frictionless materials! Balance the game around a spray and pray no overheat gun or a strong hard hitting make every shot count gun. Why remove all customization because of one stupidly balanced mod.

Heck thats the way the whole game design went down:

Frictionless made guns fire forever-remove all customization

People didn't like the crappy handling of the mako and steep cliffs-remove all planet exploration

People found the inventory very clunky-remove inventory

*sad face here* where is the middle ground

I never said it was tactical. I meant is actually made you do something else than keep firing even if it is for 2 seconds. And honestly I don't see what's the big deal with this. Just because they added reloading in the game suddenly it turned into a generic shooter? At least now they can make more versetile weapons which might not have such a large clip or as much ammo as usually because they are more powerful. Like the carnifex hand cannon, it's accurate and very poweful but it doesn't have much ammo.
I think people are just overracting over this matter.

[skan5]

Kileyan wrote...
Not picking on you, but your last sentence drives me nuts, because everyone says it! Why remove all the cool weapons mods, why not just adjust or remove the frictionless materials! Balance the game around a spray and pray no overheat gun or a strong hard hitting make every shot count gun. Why remove all customization because of one stupidly balanced mod.

^ ^ ^ THIS! It's especially frustrating when you and the people you personally knew didn't use that mod combo. But because people on "teh interwebs" claimed that mod combo is OP, then the obvious answer would be to scrap everything for a generic TPS system, yay!

THAT aside, I enjoy the game a lot. The ammo mechanic is just... meh to me. I play a lot of shooters anyways so I'm don't even think about it. I don't think I ever even looked at the ammo count...

The other argument people use is that the ammo system forces them to change to guns, and that's more enjoyable. I don't truly understand it though. Changing weapons to better match the situation is something that, imo, goes back to the Quake days. Look up the competitive videos for those and watch people switch like crazy (maybe not Q1, the RL in that game was crazy OP).

Naturally, I switched weapons a lot in ME1 and had my teammates switch weapons when the need arose. It was just a habit for me. Other people prefer not switching, maybe they're RP'ing some crazy pistol whipper or some elite highly trained sniper. I don't understand the people that did NOT enjoy not switching, but didn't bother to anyways.

I guess what I'm saying is, why do you choose not to do something, even if you'd enjoy it more, simply because the game doesn't force you? Why impose that choice on people who do not enjoy it and then claim "this system is better, you just suck?" I saw the same in other SP games like Oblivion, but that's another matter.

All this aside, if the lead's vision for the Mass Effect series is to be more of a shooter, then I say let them do their vision. Discussion and suggestions are great, but I don't agree with anyone throwing hissy fits just because the game's vision is different than what they would prefer. I understand the argument of "we buy their items, so without us they'd be out of a job! MUAHAHAHAHA!" At the same time, people say BioWare (and I agree) are competent devs and make great games with a vision. Why try to tie their hands and say "do as I say or you won't get ma money!" and then whine when other devs do that for their publishers? So I say, let them follow their damn creative vision :innocent:

(( PS And I'm not saying anyone in this thread is throwing those hissy fits, I'm just saying in general  ))

[BatarianBob]

Once upon a time video games were designed in a way that having infinite ammo could only be done by cheating.

Kids these days...

Modifié par Taranatar9, 13 mars 2010 - 05:27 .

[Bigdoser]

People like beating a dead horse.

[Kileyan]

skan5 wrote...


The other argument people use is that the ammo system forces them to change to guns, and that's more enjoyable. I don't truly understand it though. Changing weapons to better match the situation is something that, imo, goes back to the Quake days.

That works for Quake or F.E.A.R., it is a game where you are some single guy, with no special skills and no weapon restrictions. A game balanced around forcing your single protagonist to cycle through weapons frequently makes some sense.

It doesn't work in ME2. You have a couple of classes that are t-totally designed around using a single weapons as their class focus. Forcing them to switch weapons might even be cool if they had a choice of every weapon, but they don't. Forcing weapon switches with both of those classes doesn't equal variety, it equals use the SMG a whole lot, then use the SMG some more. There is no variety, it comes down to use the gun with the most bullets.

Bioware tried to copy paste the tried and true limited ammo system from other popular games, but forgot that it really only applied to their soldier class. It was mostly just a cheap system in the first place, even if Bioware didn't want to go full rpg inventory, I would have appreciated if they at least went for full tactical loadouts on the weapon screen, so I could choose my ammo ammounts and such.

[DonFredek]

THAT was the first logical response.thats what i mean.thx man.

Kileyan wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

Kirabi wrote...


I hate to put reality in fiction but in this case people don't seem to understand.In real world their is called M249 saw,It faces the same probelm that all rapid fire weapons face the barrel over heats and metal starts to warp.Which leaves you with 2 choice stop firing or change barrel.Yes that is right sometimes in battle marines and soldiers stop firing and change the barrel.

The guns in Me2 don't have ammo,they have ejectable cooling systems.The system makes perfect sense just as much sense as Marine change a barrel on a saw when start to heat up.

But that is one example of one gun in use. Which is not the norm of all guns we have today.
ME went from having guns with 0 thermal clips that only used cooling and in 2 years somehow changed every gun in the galaxy to use thermal clips. Even guns in the terminus systems, crash sites that were isolated for 10 years, and even Collector weapons.

Not to mention the tech has been around since WW1 to cool weapon barrels with something as simple as water. Water wasn't practical though, very heavy, often needed for the soldier themselves, and extra barrels were used.

In ME, we have soldiers with freeze bullets, engi's able to flash freeze 10 human size creatures with some sort of portable heat removing tech. They would use that tech to extend firing life of weapons, not limited use thermal clips.

Lastly, ME guns are made of ceramics not metal barrels, the bullets don't fit tightly into the barrels and cause huge ammounts of friction. They are tiny slivers of metals encased in an energy field and designed to be frictionless. The bullet never touches the barrel. If that energy field was able to keep the barrel a vaccum, there would be no friction and no heat, the only heat ever produced by the gun would be the energy that fired it, again something you'd cool with the cryo tech. If it can flash freeze a dozen soldiers, it is definately a portable cooling system for the individual soldiers weapon.

None of the above matters, they wanted a shooter game, with all the trapping of the dozens of other shooter games, and we have what we have:) I just want more choices in the amounts of ammo I can carry!

[DonFredek]

second good response.

Destructo-Bot wrote...

"Real" soldiers aren't by themselves killing hundreds of enemies at a time. If that was the usual situation you can bet the Army would be issuing extra mags. How many thousands (tens of thousands?) of enemies has Shepard taken down? Your typical US soldier in this day and age will complete his service with never having shot another human being. Stop bringing up "real soldiers" and "real guns", it's patently absurd in this instance.

For a specialist like a sniper to only have 12 rounds is silly. The ammo limits are WAY too low for certain classes. It makes sense for a soldier class to divide his ammo equally (but the player should have an ammo pool he can specify any way he likes) but other classes would FAR and away favor more ammo for certain weapons.... they are even carrying FEWER guns than the soldier class so they could carry MORE AMMO for the guns they do have!

[DonFredek]

[

like this could not be addressed with better AI and better shields,diffrent shields that require diffrent amo type.thats the way adaptation to changes in technology work.
quote]Braag wrote...

I support the decision BW made. Reloading adds little something to the game. I have to actually take cover and reload while in the 1st game I just held left mouse button down and aimed at everything that moved with my Assault Rifle and waited for them to die. It was boring to say the least.
And with Frictionless Materials my weapon never overheated anyway...[/quote]

[soypak]

Gameplay has been vastly improved from ME1. Quite frankly, I don't miss any RPG mechanics and reloading feels just right (it is a familiar mechanic to most players and adds depth to weapons).

[DonFredek]

sure ,why not dum down every game,lets all play callof duty or just randomly hack buttoms,thats creative.at least bioware was trying to give you something more.i dont even expect too much creativity from this industry.its not like they had to spend more money or development time to make this game great.just a few changes here and there ,they had all tools but for some reason they went the ea way.give you trophies suberb voice acting,somenice graphics,maybe some sweat animations and lets all be in awe of this creative game designing.cant belive it.i dont even wann atalk about the lore anymore,its just dumb.but why ruin great potential,cause people had issues with elevators and inventory?why not implement an button i can skip the leveator sequence but why skip it.
why delete planetory exploring why not just make it possible to jump directly to explored locations on map.
and why did the delete the possibility to mark a waypoint on the map?why do i have to press and hold button to see enemy scan window?why limit savegames to 50?there is so much tutelage,and thats exactly what i hate from games.why not give me teh choice to skip cutscenes ,why cant ic hoose the way i play,especially if it was possible in the last game.typical ea.give you one new feature ,delete 9.great and you people are defending thic practics
sorry for my english

Kileyan wrote...

Braag wrote...

I support the decision BW made. Reloading adds little something to the game. I have to actually take cover and reload while in the 1st game I just held left mouse button down and aimed at everything that moved with my Assault Rifle and waited for them to die. It was boring to say the least.
And with Frictionless Materials my weapon never overheated anyway...

Taking cover in this game is not a tactical decision, is it something you do because enemies don't miss and cover is littered around every board, every 5 steps. Reloading isn't a tactical decision either, the animatiion is so quick that it becomes a reflexive button push every several shots, not an important decision.

I don't mind the ammo or the reloading, I only mind the ammo limits that mirror popular generic shooter games, rather than a real tactical simulation. But don't stretch the reloading animation into more than it is. Its so quick it is barely more than a blip in your routine as you hide behind a waist high concrete barrier, that is on every map. I mean its cool and all, watching Shep eject a mag every few seconds, but hardly makes the game tactical.

Not picking on you, but your last sentence drives me nuts, because everyone says it! Why remove all the cool weapons mods, why not just adjust or remove the frictionless materials! Balance the game around a spray and pray no overheat gun or a strong hard hitting make every shot count gun. Why remove all customization because of one stupidly balanced mod.

Heck thats the way the whole game design went down:

Frictionless made guns fire forever-remove all customization

People didn't like the crappy handling of the mako and steep cliffs-remove all planet exploration

People found the inventory very clunky-remove inventory

*sad face here* where is the middle ground

[DonFredek]

yup.

mispelinsuks wrote...

I can see how all these changes happened . EA: So Bioware lets talk about this Mass Effect game you've got going on . Bioware : Ok whats up ? EA: Can you dumb it down a little...the mainstream casual gamers and us just don't get it. Bioware : Palm to face.

[DonFredek]

they make games for peopleand obviously the listened to this dumb suggestions the gamers had and changes the game accordingly so thats not an argument.and no,the problem is not that changing ammo is difficult,it is just unnecesseray for this game,this universe and especially pickiing up garbage and it is unnecesery to make so many lil inexcusable changes that make the game just stupid.it forces you to hit more buttoms but it does not force you to think or öprepare at all.thats the wy games should be?

and by the way next exampleof unnecesseray forcing things on me.i cant put on and off the helmet when i want to.just at special positions.its not a big issue,but what was wrong with it the last time?do i get a trophy for six succesfull armor changes ?cant wait for this achievment.what do i unlock?more thermo clips or a screenshot?

skan5 wrote...

Kileyan wrote...
Not picking on you, but your last sentence drives me nuts, because everyone says it! Why remove all the cool weapons mods, why not just adjust or remove the frictionless materials! Balance the game around a spray and pray no overheat gun or a strong hard hitting make every shot count gun. Why remove all customization because of one stupidly balanced mod.

^ ^ ^ THIS! It's especially frustrating when you and the people you personally knew didn't use that mod combo. But because people on "teh interwebs" claimed that mod combo is OP, then the obvious answer would be to scrap everything for a generic TPS system, yay!

THAT aside, I enjoy the game a lot. The ammo mechanic is just... meh to me. I play a lot of shooters anyways so I'm don't even think about it. I don't think I ever even looked at the ammo count...

The other argument people use is that the ammo system forces them to change to guns, and that's more enjoyable. I don't truly understand it though. Changing weapons to better match the situation is something that, imo, goes back to the Quake days. Look up the competitive videos for those and watch people switch like crazy (maybe not Q1, the RL in that game was crazy OP).

Naturally, I switched weapons a lot in ME1 and had my teammates switch weapons when the need arose. It was just a habit for me. Other people prefer not switching, maybe they're RP'ing some crazy pistol whipper or some elite highly trained sniper. I don't understand the people that did NOT enjoy not switching, but didn't bother to anyways.

I guess what I'm saying is, why do you choose not to do something, even if you'd enjoy it more, simply because the game doesn't force you? Why impose that choice on people who do not enjoy it and then claim "this system is better, you just suck?" I saw the same in other SP games like Oblivion, but that's another matter.

All this aside, if the lead's vision for the Mass Effect series is to be more of a shooter, then I say let them do their vision. Discussion and suggestions are great, but I don't agree with anyone throwing hissy fits just because the game's vision is different than what they would prefer. I understand the argument of "we buy their items, so without us they'd be out of a job! MUAHAHAHAHA!" At the same time, people say BioWare (and I agree) are competent devs and make great games with a vision. Why try to tie their hands and say "do as I say or you won't get ma money!" and then whine when other devs do that for their publishers? So I say, let them follow their damn creative vision :innocent:

(( PS And I'm not saying anyone in this thread is throwing those hissy fits, I'm just saying in general  ))

[DonFredek]

thats an opinion and not an argument in any way.not even trying to?no?

soypak wrote...

Gameplay has been vastly improved from ME1. Quite frankly, I don't miss any RPG mechanics and reloading feels just right (it is a familiar mechanic to most players and adds depth to weapons).

[ResidentNoob]

Kileyan wrote...

Why remove all the cool weapons mods, why not just adjust or remove the frictionless materials! Balance the game around a spray and pray no overheat gun or a strong hard hitting make every shot count gun. Why remove all customization because of one stupidly balanced mod.

Heck thats the way the whole game design went down:

Frictionless made guns fire forever-remove all customization

People didn't like the crappy handling of the mako and steep cliffs-remove all planet exploration

People found the inventory very clunky-remove inventory

*sad face here* where is the middle ground

To be fair, what the hell IS the middle ground? Because I can't figure out what it might be for the life of me.

[Tasker]

Kileyan wrote...

Braag wrote...

I support the decision BW made. Reloading adds little something to the game. I have to actually take cover and reload while in the 1st game I just held left mouse button down and aimed at everything that moved with my Assault Rifle and waited for them to die. It was boring to say the least.
And with Frictionless Materials my weapon never overheated anyway...

Taking cover in this game is not a tactical decision, is it something you do because enemies don't miss and cover is littered around every board, every 5 steps. Reloading isn't a tactical decision either, the animatiion is so quick that it becomes a reflexive button push every several shots, not an important decision.

I don't mind the ammo or the reloading, I only mind the ammo limits that mirror popular generic shooter games, rather than a real tactical simulation. But don't stretch the reloading animation into more than it is. Its so quick it is barely more than a blip in your routine as you hide behind a waist high concrete barrier, that is on every map. I mean its cool and all, watching Shep eject a mag every few seconds, but hardly makes the game tactical.

Not picking on you, but your last sentence drives me nuts, because everyone says it! Why remove all the cool weapons mods, why not just adjust or remove the frictionless materials! Balance the game around a spray and pray no overheat gun or a strong hard hitting make every shot count gun. Why remove all customization because of one stupidly balanced mod.

Heck thats the way the whole game design went down:

Frictionless made guns fire forever-remove all customization

People didn't like the crappy handling of the mako and steep cliffs-remove all planet exploration

People found the inventory very clunky-remove inventory

*sad face here* where is the middle ground

Exactly right, why fix what you can just remove?  It's a crying shame that Bioware took the easy lazy route. 

As i've said before, people moaning that frictionless material X canceled out the over heating, but they seem to forget...

...The ME series is SINGLE PLAYER, it doesn't matter that frictionless materials cancels out the heat, it only affects you and if it bothers you that much - DON'T BLOODY USE IT!!!!  There are other mods that can use the same slot.


I'm not adverse to ammo systems, but it doesn't belong in the ME universe.

Fair enough they added a codex entry explaining why the ammo system came to be, but they contradict it at several points in the game.

- Shepard states she doesn't have any thermal clips right at the start of the game, how does she know what thermal clips are, she died before they were invented?

- During Jacobs loyalty mission the enemies drop thermal clips, how can they be using them if they havnen't had outside contact since a decade before they were invented?


The thermal clip system is a step backwards compaired to the overheat system in terms of practicality too.

With the new system, I can just imagine it now, Shepard during the Skylian blitz being overun by the slavers because she runs out of thermal clips, whereas with the old one, she just needed an extra weapon.

If it was a choice between running out of ammo or carrying two assault rifles, I know which one i'd choose.

[LoweGear]

Kileyan wrote...

It doesn't work in ME2. You have a couple of classes that are t-totally designed around using a single weapons as their class focus. Forcing them to switch weapons might even be cool if they had a choice of every weapon, but they don't. Forcing weapon switches with both of those classes doesn't equal variety, it equals use the SMG a whole lot, then use the SMG some more. There is no variety, it comes down to use the gun with the most bullets.

ME2's classes are not focused around using the weapons they have for their class - classes are differentiated more by what abilities they have, with weapons second. Note that the three classes with no special weapon training - Adept, Sentinel and Engineer - all have the largest collection of long range offensive powers and abilities that do not rely on their weapons at all. These "caster" classes use their guns more to strip off enemy defenses than to kill anyway, and even the much maligned ME2 Adept with its supposedly "nerfed" biotic powers can destroy enemies without me having to fire a single shot (I love the pull/singularity + warp combo).

Also, weapon changing in FPS games like FEAR was essential because your weapons are specialized towards different types of enemies and combat situations: Sure I can kill a Heavy with my pistol, but I would get better ammo mileage using the Triple Rocket Launcher or Plasma Gun.

They simply applied the same system in ME2 and made it work: Different weapons have differing effectiveness against various enemy defenses. Sure the Tempest SMG has more ammo, but it wouldn't really deal much damage against an armored enemy like a Psion, whom you can dump your entire SMG ammo reserve on and not do much damage on levels above Hardcore (tip: Forget about using SMG's against Psions on Insanity unless you have absolutely no choice). And yet players will be able to do more damage against Psions with Heavy Pistols, combined with your character skills. So yes, the system does encourage variety due to the nature of the game's enemy defense system.

Another thing... I don't get where people are coming from stating that the inclusion of the ammo system "dumbs down" the game. The Ammo System combined with the armor/shield/barrier system introduces a tangible LIMIT that forces a player to maximize the use of his weapons based on the tactical situation in order to conserve ammo. It might force the weapon to do manual tasks like reload ammo (weapons in ME2 don't automatically reload unless you press the reload or fire button) or scour for ammo - but then, these are far more that you need to do with the ammo system than the overheat system, where you either changed weapons or just stayed in cover and waited for the weapon to cool down. Also, in many FPS games the overheat mechanic was used to balance out powerful weapons that would've given the players an unfair advantage in combat, like vehicle or wall-mounted HMG's. And guess what? In FPS games players are only given overheating weapons with unlimited ammo as a tactical reward, not as a mainstream gameplay mechanic since in the first place having infinite ammunition is more or less tantamount to cheating.

I will admit to the ammo system being sketchy lore-wise even with the Codex entry on the matter, but as a gameplay mechanic the ammo system is hardly "dumbed-down" at all, and adds much more depth to the gunplay of ME2 instead of the "run and gun" style combat that you can do in ME1.

Modifié par LoweGear, 13 mars 2010 - 11:30 .

[OneBadAssMother]

Some good points are made.



I have to admit though, I would find it better if they utilised the ammo system with actual ammo -> in other words, weapons now use full sized bullets not just chips of stuff mass accelerated.



However, I appreciate the ammo system, I prefer it to the system back in ME1. I didn't like the lore behind the new system however, but that's just me.



Gameplay wise, it's a good move. Storyline-wise... !!!!!!!

They should have made thermal clips more universal and that would change a lot. For example, you are out of ammo for your widow/mantis. Use a thermal clip already in your pistol/SMG. This would have been much better.

[DonFredek]

4th good response(maybe i lefte the 3rd out,dont know )

NewMessageN00b wrote...

Inarai wrote...

NewMessageN00b wrote...
[...]

Yes, it is a better mechanic.

A useless mechanic at that. Personally, I didn't feel any difference at all. Be it the thermal clips or thermal vents... never cared for it; felt the same. The only problem is... you run out of thermal clips and there is no option to vent it instead. Immediately puts it into ammo category.

Also, having to rush around the place to find clips... now that sucks.

It's much like an unnecessary filler. Just like the planet scanning. A waste of developer time. End result is just plain null. They discovered oxygen.

Yes. Having to scrounge for somehting because you wasted your resources does suck.  The issue, however, is with wasting your resources, whether that be clips or healing potions.  Ctting this out trivializes things - and waiting 30 seconds for a shotgun cooldown is very different from the split second reload in this game - especially if enemies are barreling in on you.

My issue is not with wasting resources (even then, hey, it's a game built around a great and impossible story; not some real life army efficiency simulator), but having to constantly replenish in a boring matter in order to keep going, made it feel, well, boring.
As for wasting resources, heck, when compared between ME1 and ME2... they feel just totally identical. I had weapon jams in ME1 as frequently as I had out-of-thermal-clips situations in ME2.
I'm not really against any of the systems, but... the solution is as cheap as it may ever get.

The lack of these exact (that were used nearly in every game up to that point) and repetitive shooter mechanics in ME1 made it enjoyable. The option to use this weapon or that was left solely to me. If I wanted, I used one never-to-reload weapon. If I wanted, I used many, but with powerful shots. This made it somewhat fresh.

The added filler mechanics in ME2 bore me the hell out and remind me of the days with Quake.
*Start optimum-movement-and-collecting-items procedure.*
*Start optimum-movement-and-shooting procedure.*
*Store results in altering brain chemistry for better reflexes and worse focus. Forget that you have a choice. Obey.*
*Repeat.* (It's brain-killing.)

[DonFredek]

number 5

Orkboy wrote...

Kileyan wrote...

Braag wrote...

I support the decision BW made. Reloading adds little something to the game. I have to actually take cover and reload while in the 1st game I just held left mouse button down and aimed at everything that moved with my Assault Rifle and waited for them to die. It was boring to say the least.
And with Frictionless Materials my weapon never overheated anyway...

Taking cover in this game is not a tactical decision, is it something you do because enemies don't miss and cover is littered around every board, every 5 steps. Reloading isn't a tactical decision either, the animatiion is so quick that it becomes a reflexive button push every several shots, not an important decision.

I don't mind the ammo or the reloading, I only mind the ammo limits that mirror popular generic shooter games, rather than a real tactical simulation. But don't stretch the reloading animation into more than it is. Its so quick it is barely more than a blip in your routine as you hide behind a waist high concrete barrier, that is on every map. I mean its cool and all, watching Shep eject a mag every few seconds, but hardly makes the game tactical.

Not picking on you, but your last sentence drives me nuts, because everyone says it! Why remove all the cool weapons mods, why not just adjust or remove the frictionless materials! Balance the game around a spray and pray no overheat gun or a strong hard hitting make every shot count gun. Why remove all customization because of one stupidly balanced mod.

Heck thats the way the whole game design went down:

Frictionless made guns fire forever-remove all customization

People didn't like the crappy handling of the mako and steep cliffs-remove all planet exploration

People found the inventory very clunky-remove inventory

*sad face here* where is the middle ground

Exactly right, why fix what you can just remove?  It's a crying shame that Bioware took the easy lazy route. 

As i've said before, people moaning that frictionless material X canceled out the over heating, but they seem to forget...

...The ME series is SINGLE PLAYER, it doesn't matter that frictionless materials cancels out the heat, it only affects you and if it bothers you that much - DON'T BLOODY USE IT!!!!  There are other mods that can use the same slot.


I'm not adverse to ammo systems, but it doesn't belong in the ME universe.

Fair enough they added a codex entry explaining why the ammo system came to be, but they contradict it at several points in the game.

- Shepard states she doesn't have any thermal clips right at the start of the game, how does she know what thermal clips are, she died before they were invented?

- During Jacobs loyalty mission the enemies drop thermal clips, how can they be using them if they havnen't had outside contact since a decade before they were invented?


The thermal clip system is a step backwards compaired to the overheat system in terms of practicality too.

With the new system, I can just imagine it now, Shepard during the Skylian blitz being overun by the slavers because she runs out of thermal clips, whereas with the old one, she just needed an extra weapon.

If it was a choice between running out of ammo or carrying two assault rifles, I know which one i'd choose.