874 réponses à ce sujet

[DarknessBear]

EternalWolfe wrote...
. . . question: How does having a squadmate UI that you apparently had trouble understanding equal making it easier for Casual Gamers?  That would seem to be problem with a bad UI, not 'making it easier'.

Because you did not have to look at it if you were a casual gamer. And they hid the "confusing stuff" like the health and shield bar. And you prove my point exactly, it is dumb. 

And people have to remember that tailoring to the mainstream and casual audiences does not make it better. We all love Mass Effect here and want it to achieve greatness. But seriously, if casual gamers got their way they would eliminate the dialogue all together and replace it with cutscenes. 

Modifié par DarknessBear, 14 mars 2010 - 09:35 .

[A Fhaol Bhig]

scyphozoa wrote...

yeah sample size is thrown out the window when you consider that this forum population is made up of the people who want to express their opinions badly enough to find this forum. I am pretty sure if your entire sample is based out of people who all choose to populate a single website, your sample is biased and moot.

You can generalize, but unless 3million plus people who've played, or bought the game all vote on your poll, you can not prove one point or another like that.

[Destructo-Bot]

Gemini1179 wrote...
For example, I keep reading posts of people saying they didn't mind or even miss the elevator rides from ME1 (myself included) but a lot of game reviews I read in the past and other forums talking about ME1 had so many bad things to say about the elevators. Same went for the Mako.

It wasn't elevators in general, it was the C-SEC to DOCK elevator specifically that took forever that people hated. Elevators and the airlock were IMMERSIVE, they just need to be kept as short as possible!

[neomagic9]

Modifié par neomagic9, 14 mars 2010 - 09:47 .

[WilliamShatner]

exxxed wrote...

yoda23 wrote...

BlightWalker wrote...

Am I the only PC gamer who is disturbed by there only being the 360 versions shown and snippets like 'designed for 360' ?

no you are not.

Yep you're not

 PLUS the damn thing is that they REVAMPED all the things xbox players were crying for (inventory, gameplay, Mako)

 That's why all this is upsetting at least...

Most of these posts can be answered with this question:

 Have you ever played Mass Effect 1 on PC?

360 is the home of Mass Effect.  Deal with it.

Also the success of Borderlands and Fallout 3 on 360 puts to rest any debate that console players don't like inventory or looting.

Modifié par WilliamShatner, 14 mars 2010 - 09:42 .

[CatatonicMan]

LoweGear wrote...

It's only a fiasco only if the ammo system was so utterly broken that the gameplay objectively failed because of it. However, given that the ammo system as it was implemented in ME2 is similar to the way most FPS and TPS shooters do it (simplified even, since you only have a single type of thermal clip for every weapon), and that said system has met with much success in all of those titles, along with said system having met no bugs or problems in actual implementation, the "failure" of the ammo system is more of an opinion of those who don't like it than an actual gameplay issue, simply because it was a change from the previous system used in Mass Effect 1.

As it is implemented, there really is nothing wrong with the ammo system, and most of the complaints are either due to players who:

1. Got used to the Mass Effect 1 overheat system
2. Don't like having to scrounge for ammo
3. Don't like having to manage ammo count
4. Claim the ammo system is a "dumbed down" system from the overheat system

1) is somewhat understandable, if irrational.
2) is slightly understandable in the least, but given the position of enemies in the game and the amount of ammo spawn points I don't see how this is a problem at all
3) is for those who use weapons without much regard for fire discipline or tactics, and hence end up using more ammo than they need to kill an enemy. It's not a problem of the ammo system then, but of the player's skills - the limitation is there as a challenge afterall
4) Given the amount of work needed for the ammo system compared to the overheat system, I fail to see how this can be a point at all

The ammo system is equally loved and equally hated it seems by everyone who visits these forums, but to call it a "fiasco" just because of the posts that hate it is truly unfair, especially since these forums are not indicative of the actual majority/minority opinion of ALL the players who've played Mass Effect 2, but simply the opinions of the individuals who do post here on the forums.

The ammo system is, as far as I am concerned, simply idiotic.

It could have been good, but they implemented it so badly that I have not one scrap of respect for the system.

By their own lore (that they decided to clumsily alter), there should have been a universal pool of heat clips that all weapons drew from. There wasn't.

The weapons should have been able to cool down if left alone giving an infinite (if slow) ammo supply. Didn't happen.

There should have been swappable weapon mods that worked with the heat clips and ammo system. Nope, too complicated.

There should have been weapons available that didn't use the heat clips (obviously, because they were there before). Can't do that, though; it would make too much sense.

Hell, they didn't even allow you to add all the picked up ammo to your current weapon - a blatant mechanic designed to 'encourage' the use of different weapons. 

They designed the ammo system to force players to use different weapons, and they implemented it in such a way that it was blatantly obvious what they intended - against all logic, reason, and canon.

They could have made an ammo system that worked and made sense; they didn't.

Modifié par CatatonicMan, 14 mars 2010 - 09:45 .

[Weiser_Cain]

WilliamShatner wrote...

exxxed wrote...

yoda23 wrote...

BlightWalker wrote...

Am I the only PC gamer who is disturbed by there only being the 360 versions shown and snippets like 'designed for 360' ?

no you are not.

Yep you're not

 PLUS the damn thing is that they REVAMPED all the things xbox players were crying for (inventory, gameplay, Mako)

 That's why all this is upsetting at least...

Most of these posts can be answered with this question:

 Have you ever played Mass Effect 1 on PC?

360 is the home of Mass Effect.  Deal with it.

Also the success of Borderlands and Fallout 3 on 360 puts to rest any debate that console players don't like inventory or looting.

I always hated Kirk.

[Sith_exar_kun]

I Played with sniper rifle almost 100% of the time and i was quite never out of ammo...

So maybe you waste a lot of clips...

[slyguy07]

DarknessBear wrote...

Destructo-Bot wrote...

While you are looking at this thread please consider revamping:

Heat Sinks
Don't like playing garbage collector and scrounging sinks after a fight. Don't like being forced out of a favored weapon due to ammo. Don't like not having an infinite ammo weapon (staple in shooters) to fall back on. Pistols should be cooling instead of heatsinked.

Ammo per class
Why do infiltrators and vanguards have the same ammo capacity for snipers and shotguns as everyone else when the class is supposed to focus on that particular weapon? This ends with the class primarily using their SECONDARY weapon that actually has reserve ammo to save their "PRIMARY" for when they may need it.

Cover
Cover STILL isn't "safe". Harbinger or whatever knocks you out of cover, then you adrenaline hammer the action key to get back into cover. Instead of taking cover your character vaults over the cover and into the direct line of fire of two heavy mechs. The key that saves your life is also the key that gets you killed.

Ammo Powers
CONSTANTLY REACTIVATING THE ****ING POWERS EVERY ****ING TIME I ****ING QUICK LOAD. The ammo "power" should be permanent, NOT PER MISSION, NOT PER LOAD, NOT PER GAME... PERMANENT. They are there until I choose to change them. So very, very, very irritating to cycle through all my weapons and reapply ammo powers EVERY ****ING TIME to EVERY ****ING GUN. P.S. This in particular annoys me, you may not have caught that.

Inventory
We LIKE inventories. We don't like BAD inventories. ME1 had a BAD inventory and a glut of useless items with no sorting and grouping options. Improve and not remove was what many were expecting.

Armor Designer/Character Designer
This is good but it needs more options and more colors. I miss the look of Colossus and Rage armors. Good start. Everyone wants more personalization options (hair styles, clothes, etc) so...

Game Options
If you are shooter, where are the reticule options? FOV options? You know what I want to do as a sniper? When I blast someone with a headshot and they have 1 point of health left I want to a key to quick draw my sidearm and put them down and then the sidearm is put away and the rifle re-raised.

Fatigue
Why can a trained super-soldier like Shepard only run 10 feet at a time. Let us RUN dammit! If we aren't in a fight we should be able to run for quite a long time. Get rid of the silly fatigue outside of combat. And if you are going to HAVE fatigue, DON'T REMOVE THE FREAKING FATIGUE METER. The only difference between ME1 and ME2 is that I now just end up HAMMERING the STORM key OVER AND OVER until it works.

Listen to this guy. I 100% agree with everything here. And I definitely think there should be a mixture of guns that use thermal clips and guns that overheat. 

Couldn't agree more with what this fella said. Ammo system is a codex breaker and immersion breaker. If anyone has read the novels like I have it is even more so. Make a hybrid system where the weapons just ventilate the heat in the same time it would take to reload a thermal clip. (OMGZ not infinte ammo ppl are flipping out now!!!) Yes this is 200 years in the future with the aid of alien tech I might add found on Mars.  If you have read the codex you know each weapon holds abt. 4000 rounds. Doing a hybrid system would keep the pace the same and fit the codex better.

Having to scrouge all over the place for thermal clips is annoying. Concession to shooters imo. And what's thermal clips doing on a planet cut off for 10 years from the galaxy? Or on a Collector Vessel? Hmm...

[neomagic9]

Dear Chirstina Norman and Bioware Team,
    I would like to start by congratulating you and Bioware for producing an amazing game, Mass Effect 2.  I have long been a fan of Bioware and I feel the Mass Effect franchise is one of the best yet.  I was reading through the slides you posted from your talk at this year’s GDC conference.  I want to thank you for making these slides publicly available as they provide justification, insight and reason behind some of the most controversial decisions that went into Mass Effect 2.  I would like to provide feedback on these slides and the decisions made by Bioware.
    First and foremost, I would like to acknowledge and commend Bioware’s risk taking and innovation in game design.  The decision to forget labels and have no “sacred cows” contrasts strongly against a number of recent games that reuse a “successful formula”.  The design of Mass Effect 2 certainly glows against the dim backdrop of the majority of other RPGs.  Mass Effect 2 represents the pinnacle for cinematic storytelling, character interaction, and engaging real time combat.  I am excited to see where the design team will take the game in Mass Effect 3.  With respect to the goals for Mass Effect 2, more satisfying combat, better balance, and better inventory, the design goals of were accomplished to an extent.
    Mass Effect 2 provides visceral and intensely fun shooter combat.  While not a true first or third person shooter, Mass Effect 2 provides shooter game play on par with games like Gears of War and other top games.  The goals established for more satisfying combat were unquestionably achieved.  All weapons now fit the universe and characters that use them.  No longer is a specter agent unable to shoot with a modicum of accuracy due to a “lack of training”.  The cover system provides an intuitive, realistic system.  The intense feel of combat, however, was hit or miss for me.  Depending on the difficulty, the battles either proved trivial or overly difficult.  On veteran difficulty, I was able to easily best my foe, while I repeatedly died on hardcore difficulty.  Moreover, the battles became slightly repetitive after an enemy was introduced.  For example, the first encounter with a YMIR mech proved extremely intense and trilling; by the end, however, the YMIR seemed commonplace and no more challenging mech took its place.  The lack of enemy variety became exacerbated by a lack of weapon variety.  Facing off against the Blue Suns with the same basic weapons for the hundredth time became uninteresting.  Overall, however, the combat was intense and kept my interest as the game progressed.
    In terms of balance, Mass Effect 2 shines.  The systems of resists, powers, classes, and weapons all integrate to provide a unique and satisfying experience.  The combat proved almost like a puzzle rather than a straight spray and pray shooter.  My criticism of the balance is it’s the limiting nature.  Because a global cool down was implemented, I often felt that I was unable to use a power when I needed it most.  When playing as an infiltrator, for example, I would cloak, take a sniper shot and then try to finish my opponent with incineration.  Because of the long cool down from cloaking, I would be forced to take cover while my powers cooled down.  I understand that a global cool down was used to make the game more real time and easier to balance, but I believe better options exist.  An alternate scheme to both the Mass Effect 1 and 2 implementations would be to use 2 cool down meters.  One meter would track tech abilities and the other would track biotic abilities.  This implementation also fits in more closely with the IP as biotics use an implant and tech powers use the omni-tool.  Pure characters like the Engineer and Adept would have two meters of the same type.  The second cool down meter for pure characters would allow flexibility to use one strong but long cool down power with weak quick powers.  Furthermore, the lack of weapon variety seemed limiting.  With only two or three weapons in a given category, I felt that combat had a tendency to become stale.  For the most part, the balance of Mass Effect 2 provided consistent and engaging game play.
    The area in which I feel the design team made the most significant progress yet failed to meet their goals is the inventory system.  The inventory system in Mass Effect 1 was broken and the new system in Mass Effect 2 does remedy many of the shortcomings of its predecessor.  In an attempt to atone for the superfluity of the original, Mass Effect 2’s system overcompensated to the point of non-existence.  Though nothing could be simpler than no inventory, a pillar of role playing games becomes obscured.  While most role playing games try to achieve the pillars of exploration, story, progression, and collection, Mass Effect 2 essentially removed the last pillar.  Despite facing off against numerous enemies, I never once received any useful items after a fight.  With the piles of assault rifles, pistols, and the like lying around, it seems odd that I needed to wait to collect an extra weapon.  If the upgrade system was meant to bolster this final pillar, the system only helped transparently.  The upgrade system in Mass Effect 2 provided me no satisfaction.  While I was upgrade all my weapons, the upgrades had little visible impact.  As the enemies scaled in difficulty, so did my weapons.  To remedy this, I suggest a system similar to that used with armor.  Allow weapon customization with different researched or purchased components.  Each weapon would have several upgrade slots (barrel, trigger, stock, magazine) and an applied upgrade would change the weapon model to visibly indicate its presence. In this way, weapon customizations could have a meaningful, personal change. If a tactical scope is added to an assault rifle, the stock slot would be filled, a scope would appear on the rifle and the accuracy statistic of the rifle would increase by 10 percent.  This could even allow the option to zoom in with the rifle or affect other behavior depending on the upgrade.  I realize that this complicates party upgrades; however, upgrades would now have meaning.  Implementing upgrades like armor allows for relatively few weapons to feel like many more without adding significant clutter.  Beyond weapon upgrades, I am unsure why visible biotic implant and omni-tool upgrades are absent.  Mass effect 2 provided researchable tech/biotic power and cool down upgrades but failed to ground these in the game world.  I would have preferred to buy a new model of omni-tool or biotic implant to gain these benefits.  The models of implants and omni-tools could also provided visual feedback based on biotic glow and omni-tool shape and color.  The other pillar that became abstracted due to the streamlined game design is progression.  For the most part, character development in Mass Effect 2 is vastly superior to its predecessor.  The inclusion of ammo powers instead of additional tech or biotic powers baffles me.  I fail to understand how different ammo types in the world are linked to a character.  Instead, ammo should be handled in mission using the weapon selection wheel.  When selecting a weapon, a user could hold down “a” over a weapon to expand the wheel and select a different ammo type.  This would free up a skill slot for a more character dependent power or skill and allow for faster selection of ammo types for multiple weapons.  To replace ammo skill progression, improved ammo types could be researched, found, or purchased.   The inventory system, while sufficient, is the area which could be most improved.
    In all, Mass Effect 2 represents a sharp game play divide with Mass Effect 1.  Naturally decisions of this magnitude are polarizing.  I personally congratulate you and the design team for taking a chance and designing without bounds.  The resulting game design provides a fresh design and a beacon for future role playing games. Not without flaw, the revised game acts as starting point that needs expanded into a more robust and meaningful system.  Combat needs more exciting enemies, greater weapon variation, and perhaps more fined tuned difficulties.  The system of powers and balance needs expanded to not feel limiting and constricting.  The inventory system needs meaningful and impactful substance. With these design ideas in mind, Mass Effect 3 has the potential to outshine even Mass Effect 2.
    The Mass Effect team has truly produced a great game with an epic narrative, interesting character, and fun combat.  You and your design team set out to achieve several goals for Mass Effect 2 and, in my opinion, succeeded in most regards.  I understand design has an iterative nature and always continues.  I am thoroughly impressed with Bioware’s work and their commitment to fan input.  The slide which shows the areas for improvement demonstrates an incredible attention to the criticisms and ideas of reviewers and players.  I understand that my ideas are likely not novel and have likely been discussed internally, on the forums, or elsewhere.  Mass Effect 2 is an incredible game that leaves me in anticipation for the third part.  Because of this, I felt it necessary to commend you on the work you have completed and provide feedback for the third installment.  I hope this feedback helps guide the design team and helps enable Bioware to continue produces games of the highest caliber. Thank you again for your commitment to your fans and devotion to video game development.
Thank You for Your Time,
Neomagic9

[slyguy07]

scyphozoa wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

scyphozoa wrote...

what heat-sink fiasco? there is no fiasco. the devs wanted to add an ammo mechanic and it works. i don't care about the lore about how guns fire, i'm here to stop reapers. as far as i'm concerned the shooting is better off with heat sinks.

So basically, "I don't care about lore or believability or the established universe or anything else, I just wanna shoot things until they die." Congrats, you're exactly the type of gamer BioWare was hoping to attract with ME2.

And considering that heat sinks are one of if not THE most controversial features of ME2 (as evidenced by the hundreds upon hundreds of "Heat Sinks: WTF?" threads on these forums), I think it's fair to call it a fiasco.

lol, wrong but funny. i don't care about heat sinks because they HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE STORY. No, I do not care about a small detail that is absolutely irrelevant in the large picture. I care about the story telling and the character depth, not the detail of how a scifi gun reloads. I can't imagine why anyone is hung up on the "Lore" of heat-sinks other than that they are using it as a basis to complain from.

Any reasonable gamer like me knows that gameplay comes first 100% of the time. I gladly embrace a better game mechanic than some corny 2 sentence lore about why guns fire in the year 2250. Sorry, don't try to summarize my opinions, I own every Bioware game released, so please don't tell me my taste in games either. People are presumptious as hell when they think it can help them prove a point.

Even if it is immersion breaking or something like that. Yeah I mean what would they be thinking? Not like it would hurt the game or anything for some people. Talk about being presumptious.

[WillieStyle]

Gameplay ALWAYS trumps lore.
If your goal is to convince Bioware developers to do away with ammo and return to the overheat mechanism of ME1, then I suggest you come up with gameplay reasons for such a change. Crying about "lore" and "immersion" will get you absolutely nowhere.

Hmm, considering that I don't want such a change to happen, perhaps I shouldn't have posted this.

Also, complaints about "casual gamers" are amusing coming from folks who complain about:
-limitted ammo
-enemies knocking you out of cover
-nerfs to biotics
-not enough loot.
I've been playing CRPGs for 12 years.  In that time, hardcore players were usually the ones who hated "loot" and wanted games to be as hard as possible with serious limits to resources.

Modifié par WillieStyle, 14 mars 2010 - 09:58 .

[slyguy07]

WillieStyle wrote...

Gameplay ALWAYS trumps lore.
If your goal is to convince Bioware developers to do away with ammo and return to the overheat mechanism of ME1, then I suggest you come up with gameplay reasons for such a change. Crying about "lore" and "immersion" will get you absolutely nowhere.

Hmm, considering that I don't want such a change to happen, perhaps I shouldn't have posted this.

Yeah glad to see you've added some productivity to this thread. I did suggest something that has been suggested many times if you actually read my first post in this thread. The hybrid system.

[LoweGear]

^ Which I forgot to my list, is another of the complaints against the ammo system



5) Disagrees with the logic of the lore behind thermal clips

By their own lore (that they decided to clumsily alter), there should have been a universal pool of heat clips that all weapons drew from. There wasn't.

Isn't that how it was implemented though? All your weapons use the same thermal clips, and all your weapons can use them regardless of type. This is different from most other shooters where you had different ammo types for different weapons, ex. needing to find pistol ammo for pistols, or rifle ammo for assault rifles etc...



Power Cells are a different matter, but of course they're different because the weapons they're powering are fundamentally different from the standard firearms.

The weapons should have been able to cool down if left alone giving an infinite (if slow) ammo supply. Didn't happen.

This I actually agree with. Although it has to be done in such a manner as to still 'balance' the game to not give the player instant unlimited ammo.

There should have been swappable weapon mods that worked with the heat clips and ammo system. Nope, too complicated.

No comment there.

There should have been weapons available that didn't use the heat clips (obviously, because they were there before). Can't do that, though; it would make too much sense.

Stated problem is a lore issue, not a gameplay one; had they added the overheating weapons to the game, it would've broken the entire mechanic in the first place - i.e. why use the weapons that would potentially run out when I have a weapon that never runs out? It would discourage variety in the use of weapons.

Hell, they didn't even allow you to add all the picked up ammo to your current weapon - a blatant mechanic designed to 'encourage' the use of different weapons.

Would it have been better had all the ammo been taken from a universal pool, and then finding out that you no longer have any ammo for your weapons simply because you wasted it on a single one? I suppose I could appreciate the extra challenge, similar to how power cells for heavy weapons are shared between HW types...

They could have made an ammo system that worked and made sense; they didn't.

It's shady in lore maybe. But as a gameplay mechanic, there's nothing really wrong with how the ammo system was implemented (i.e. it wasn't broken, and it wasn't buggy), given that it's one of the more successful formulas in FPS and TPS that's simply been given to ME2.

[Edix]

ME1 is better than ME2. I don't care how many "critics" (most of whom think Call of Duty IZ TEH BEST GAME EVAR!) say otherwise. Keep your CoD out of my RPG. They dumbed down the game plain and simple THAT is the only reason it did so well (on consoles) cause we can NOT have ANYTHING complicated for a console user because they just can not handle it. Try to make a game that appeals to everyone and you will make a game that appeals to NO ONE!

Modifié par Edix, 14 mars 2010 - 10:08 .

[slyguy07]

scyphozoa wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

Gameplay ALWAYS trumps lore.
If your goal is to convince Bioware developers to do away with ammo and return to the overheat mechanism of ME1, then I suggest you come up with gameplay reasons for such a change. Crying about "lore" and "immersion" will get you absolutely nowhere.

lol, /signed

Really? Seeing as they almost didn't implement the thermal clip system and that possibly being one of them.

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/103/index/1707043

[CatatonicMan]

WillieStyle wrote...

Gameplay ALWAYS trumps lore.
If your goal is to convince Bioware developers to do away with ammo and return to the overheat mechanism of ME1, then I suggest you come up with gameplay reasons for such a change. Crying about "lore" and "immersion" will get you absolutely nowhere.

Hmm, considering that I don't want such a change to happen, perhaps I shouldn't have posted this.

Gameplay (or rather, fun) should indeed always trump lore - but only if there is no other choice that satisfies both.

In this case, Bioware looked at the first part, but forgot the second.

[A Fhaol Bhig]

NewMessageN00b wrote...

DarknessBear wrote...

Yes! Exactly. That is why I was so hurt at the beginning of the game (right when you pick up your pistol) it was like... THEY RAPED MY FAVORITE GAME OF ALL TIME! And at the interface; what junk. It seriously took me an entire playthrough to figure out what the hell the Squad Mate UI section means. So bad. The UI they had at E3 was entirely better, but again, they had to make it easier for Casual Gamers. 

BIOWARE! SCREW the casual gamer dammit, ME1 was for the hardcore and it did great. Why stop?! Sellouts. 

I can be supporting this in a million ways. (Alright, not a million, but anyway.)

But I came across a realization... Namely, I've got a buddy, who lured me into playing Mass Effect 1. His opinion was "What a piece of crap, I won't ever take in my hands again, but you might like it."

So I did... But still... He played it on the 360, while I'm doing it on PC. Our opinion is literally black and white, when it comes to everything not presentation and storytelling related.

Might there be such a huge difference in clunkiness and control of the vehicle using a controller and usage of the inventory and some other issues, compared to a keyboard and mouse?

I mean, you can do A LOT more using a mouse and a keyboard during the same time, so it could've left the console players stranded on slow repetitive tasks, while PC players were able to deal with it JUST within the annoyance margin.

And yes, the game was raped. Adjusted for simplicity, which sucks by definition.

The game was orginally Xbox Exclusive, so it couldn't be ajusted for simplicity as if it were a port...Bioware just didn't have alot of experience with vehicles and shooters...

[A Fhaol Bhig]

slyguy07 wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

Gameplay ALWAYS trumps lore.
If your goal is to convince Bioware developers to do away with ammo and return to the overheat mechanism of ME1, then I suggest you come up with gameplay reasons for such a change. Crying about "lore" and "immersion" will get you absolutely nowhere.

Hmm, considering that I don't want such a change to happen, perhaps I shouldn't have posted this.

Yeah glad to see you've added some productivity to this thread. I did suggest something that has been suggested many times if you actually read my first post in this thread. The hybrid system.

pwned XD