874 réponses à ce sujet

[Fluffeh Kitteh]

TJSolo wrote...
It is my contention that the intended direction is boring and complexity should be added back in.

I dunno, frankly I find the combat and planet scanning to be more "boring" than the negligible inventory. Maybe it's because I can't really imagine how inventory would make it any "less" boring when all that's being added are some items (unless, like I said, the items were integral, with significant purposes rather than being superifical stat-changing stuff like the armour pieces in the game right now). It's like units in an RTS or guns in a FPS. I wouldn't expect an already-boring game to become that much less boring if there were simply more units or more guns. Heck Borderlands had truckloads of guns, and it was still rather boring, as the core gameplay was always something like activate/pick up/destroy 3 or 4 separate things at various locations on the map, after which it counts as a quest accomplished.

To make the game less boring, its core infrastructure needs to be reworked to avoid instances of predictability or repetitiveness. Having a good inventory is nice and all but IMO it's not really tacking the key issues that make the game boring. Even if there were a good inventory, you wouldn't be spending tons of time poring through its contents anyway, in fact if that were so, the inventory might actually be more of a bad thing as it's side-tracking you away from the main gist of the game, kinda like the planet scanning which you have to do a LOT of.

TJSolo wrote...
You aren't making any points for or against ME2. Just statements that means it is what it is.

I would speak out if there were things I dislike or have very stong opposition towards. If this were a thread about planet scanning or about having way too many squadmates, you'd certainly see a lot more negativity coming out of me. You mentioned that the whole issue was never about between the extreme of massive inventory or no inventory at all. Similarly, opinions aren't entirely black or white either. People do have neutral standpoints on the matter.

Modifié par Fluffeh Kitteh, 16 mars 2010 - 08:49 .

[Jebel Krong]

this thread is a great example of people stuck with certain preconceptions of what they think an rpg should be and features it *should* contain by default, rather than accepting (ME2) for the game it actually is.

[killingsheep24]

1000's of crap guns are crap, love the new change, more time spent kicking arse less time playing with stats.

[Terror_K]

Jebel Krong wrote...

this thread is a great example of people stuck with certain preconceptions of what they think an rpg should be and features it *should* contain by default, rather than accepting (ME2) for the game it actually is.

A shallow one?

[CaptainZaysh]

I found the missing inventory surprising at first. But I think it makes ME2 a much better game. Shepard's time is spent saving the galaxy instead of looting all the bodies.



Winning a firefight then pushing through just feels much more exciting than winning a firefight then searching the room for weapons to steal. The whole experience feels more fluid and I think putting loot drops back in would be a huge step backwards.

[finnithe]

I really don't understand the issue with ammunition. It's not just ammo scarcity that encourages diverse weapon use, its the different protection multipliers. It makes a lot of sense that a rapid fire weapon like the SMG is stronger against shields. Kinetic barriers, if you remember, work by being activated whenever an object of considerable velocity is travelling towards the user.



As for the inventory thing, I'm pretty sure Bioware screwed up on this one. No inventory is not a good substitute for a crappy one when it would have been possible to have something in the middle ground. I like Terror_K's mockup.

[FluxDeluxe]

I like the new system, Mass Effect's economy was broke. However i do think a little complexity could be added in. New biotic amps, New omni tools, unique ammo powers that can be purchased and a far wider variety of Armour to purchase. There needs to be more standard weapons also and less emphasis on heavy weapons. Talking about weapon balance there needs to be more variety rather than tempest is better than standard SMG etc. As i said the stripped down feel to the game is great but i think they went just a little too far. I would also like to see some form of squad armor micro management it makes your characters a little more unique. I also think they should add a little more complexity to the armour and items including types of kinetic barriers, attachments for armour which grant or enhance certain special abilities. Oh and make every thing individual pieces. It should be a player decision on what types of armor they wear rather than forcing them down the lines of complete sets.

[Pocketgb]

CatatonicMan wrote...

I personally don't like being shoehorned into using different weapons for the sake of ammo conservation. Weapon usage should be based on effectiveness and tactics, not arbitrary and nonsensical limitations. The fact that the primary reason to use multiple weapons boils down to ammo scarcity indicates that they did something wrong with the weapon system (heavy weapons not withstanding - they are a class of their own).

The reason you have limited shots with the weapons in ME1 is the exact same reason why you don't see the rocket launcher have infinite ammo in Doom, and it's also why the ammo you find for it is rather scarce.

But more simply? You just have to look at sniper rifles, or the carnifex, or really really good guns .

[Fluffeh Kitteh]

Terror_K wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

this thread is a great example of people stuck with certain preconceptions of what they think an rpg should be and features it *should* contain by default, rather than accepting (ME2) for the game it actually is.

A shallow one?

Perceived depth of gameplay is a highly subjective matter.

Plus I still stand by what I said earlier. Adding a loot system and inventory won't make this game any less shallow. What could you possibly do? Browse through your hoard of stuff while hiding behind a crate to make the combat system suddenly seem much more dynamic and exciting? or perhaps rearrange your items in the inventory in-between scanning planets? I mean, it's not like a huge chunk of the game's quality hinges on the existence or lack thereof of shiny items to pick up on the ground, unless said shiny items actually have non-superficial significance.

Modifié par Fluffeh Kitteh, 16 mars 2010 - 11:15 .

[Vaeliorin]

Terror_K wrote...
Here's a mock-up I made of the basic thing I would have liked to have seen for ME2 and would like to see for ME3:-

I like it.  Bioware, make it so!

[M 3 i m 0 n]

Ok maybe we don't really need a big inventory. We're not like Sansone, Ercole, ... but we can take just some ammo upgrades (like the weapon customization system in ME1), or just 1 pistol plus 1 smg and some hand grenades (or something like those... in the future we haven't hand grenades? i have appreciate grenades in ME1). Few weapons. We have not all the space of the word to carry them. This have sense. But we should pick up the weapons, just 2 repair them (maybe like in Stalker? it's an idea): in a shootout weapons takes damage. Like armours. So we need to repair them. And maybe in the future we have only few manufacturer that makes weapons, armours, ok. This can be possible. Maybe we have few kind of weapons. ok. but i can't believe that i can't customize them. this have nosense. In a battle field people (turians, krogans, batarians...) are not dummyes. they must have something on theire bodyes.
Now i know that this is ot but i'd like 2 write here an idea of "SolitonMan": "The more I think about it, the more
I'm disappointed with the inclusion of ammo in the game. Not in the
implementation itself, which was perfectly fine. No, it's what ammo
inclusion represents - compliance on the part of Bioware with the whim
of a few, instead of considering their own vision for a game. I really,
really, really do not understand why having the OPTION to upgrade a
weapon and make it never overheat was such a peeve of some people. How
can it possibly affect anyone else how I choose to upgrade MY weapon?
And if you hate unlimited ammo, why would you ever use that
configuration?"
Sure the implementation of the ammo system itself is good, but is the clips system that i can't understand. A thing that make me feel like an idiot is watching my teammate. They just shot more than me and never end the munitions! LOL!!!! That’s another reason why I dislike the new system. The old system have a great logic! And can be possible 4 a future 2! Indeed I’ve seen that system in some films. I know that BioWare Justified their decision through the codex… but... Also note this. U can take the clips just walking on them. This doesn’t break the fighting sequence. What about an animation (Shepard crouch an take the clips when he is walking, or make a *****, or something like, if he is running)? This let u the choice to use u’re biotic powers (or u can use 1 of u’re team to take the attentions of u’re enemies and take the fire) to stop the enemy’s fire 4 the time that u need 2 take the clips. This is an exemple/idea. But I like the overheating system. That make me scream: “WTF!!!! This should be the future!”

Modifié par M 3 i m 0 n, 16 mars 2010 - 11:48 .

[Murmillos]

Jebel Krong wrote...

this thread is a great example of people stuck with certain preconceptions of what they think an rpg should be and features it *should* contain by default, rather than accepting (ME2) for the game it actually is.

I'm glad you speak for all of us on what we should be able and not able to think; want and are not able to want.

/sarcasm

[Murmillos]

flem1 wrote...

Bio isn't going to bring back the stupid loot management minigame that's weighed down every previous RPG for ME3, are they?

ME2 was wonderful in its purity. Just need more appearance options.

We dont want a stupid loot system like ME1, but we don't want the no-loot system that ME2 has either.  Thats what the debate is; trying to find that balance in just what is that worthwhile number of weapons/upgrades/loot that still provides the satisfaction of gaining loot, while never taking away from the gameplay or bogging down the system/immerstion by carring 20 armors, 100 weapons by the end of every mission.

As I've suggested; keep the weapons as they are now, but instead of the generic boring +10% upgrades, the better versions of the weapons are randomly scattered for you to find; and the upgrade process works just as passively as it does now.  If you find a better weapon version of the weapon you are carrying, you and everybody else whom used that same weapon gets the upgrade too. If you are not using that weapon, its up to you to choose to then use it there.. or carry it back to the Normandy for the squad members whom do. Again, because you'll only find 1 to 3 upgrades per world, its a realistic approach of the number of upgrades you could find and carry with you. Not the magical endless bag of loot [ or at least 150 items] that ME1 had.  Once the new version is aquired and replicated to everybody in the squad, all old versions are gone - result, no micromanaging.

This brings back the feeling of getting loot, while never bogging down the system of having to micro manage the weapons.

The same could be done to armor peices.  You find armor pieces randomly in the world, starting with "headshot visor +3%", but by the end of the game, getting "headshot visor +15%".

If you are wearing it headshot visor, you automatically upgrade to the better found version, if not, it auto-replaces the lesser version - for you to choose to use at a later time.

Modifié par Murmillos, 16 mars 2010 - 12:03 .

[Hulk Hsieh]

I remembered looking at the cut-scene that Normandy members gets to arm.

They don't pull out weapons from their "inventory", but to get those guns from a "gun shelf".

The weapon selection system makes perfect sense in such setting.

[Jebel Krong]

Murmillos wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

this thread is a great example of people stuck with certain preconceptions of what they think an rpg should be and features it *should* contain by default, rather than accepting (ME2) for the game it actually is.

I'm glad you speak for all of us on what we should be able and not able to think; want and are not able to want.

/sarcasm

your signature speaks volumes.

everyone can want what they like, however it is not their game to demand those things. many of you rpg purists have a tick-box of features an rpg must conform to to be classed as much - dare to omit anything and it's suddenly "shallow" even if there are multitudes of other facets to the game.

for example: with the ammo system (like it or loathe it) it would be difficult if not impossible to balance add-on mods for weapons, except for the way they've actually already done it.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 16 mars 2010 - 12:07 .

[Murmillos]

Terror_K wrote...

Here's a mock-up I made of the basic thing I would have liked to have seen for ME2 and would like to see for ME3:-

I like what I see here.. but for the stat Penetration; its a bit ambiguous/unclear.  But I don't have a clear idea at the moment is now to make it work.  I just know from looking at it - I wouldn't know what it would mean.  I know what penetration is and how it works within ME2, but not how it would be indicated by a clear easy stat; or as a numerical stat.

[Jebel Krong]

Fluffeh Kitteh wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

this thread is a great example of people stuck with certain preconceptions of what they think an rpg should be and features it *should* contain by default, rather than accepting (ME2) for the game it actually is.

A shallow one?

Perceived depth of gameplay is a highly subjective matter.

Plus I still stand by what I said earlier. Adding a loot system and inventory won't make this game any less shallow. What could you possibly do? Browse through your hoard of stuff while hiding behind a crate to make the combat system suddenly seem much more dynamic and exciting? or perhaps rearrange your items in the inventory in-between scanning planets? I mean, it's not like a huge chunk of the game's quality hinges on the existence or lack thereof of shiny items to pick up on the ground, unless said shiny items actually have non-superficial significance.

this. flippancy aside, the game is as deep in many areas as you make it. the stat-based gameplay is still present in damage of weapons/modifiers/powers, even if it is integrated well enough to not be particularly noticeable (which is ideal). the idea of features is not to replace gameplay but to integrate and enhance them. spending hours individually changing level V scram rails into level VII and then X ones is not interesting gameplay, nor is it realistic or fun.

[Murmillos]

Jebel Krong wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

this thread is a great example of people stuck with certain preconceptions of what they think an rpg should be and features it *should* contain by default, rather than accepting (ME2) for the game it actually is.

I'm glad you speak for all of us on what we should be able and not able to think; want and are not able to want.

/sarcasm

your signature speaks volumes.

everyone can want what they like, however it is not their game to demand those things. many of you rpg purists have a tick-box of features an rpg must conform to to be classed as much - dare to omit anything and it's suddenly "shallow" even if there are multitudes of other facets to the game.

for example: with the ammo system (like it or loathe it) it would be difficult if not impossible to balance add-on mods for weapons, except for the way they've actually already done it.

Its not that an RPG much require a tick-box as items for it to be an RPG.  I've played too many PRG's that all excluded one form of standard RPG feature or another; even many PRG's that didn't even have a loot system - and never once was there an issue, because the rest of the RPG features were strong enough to overcome the lack of the feature, or the lack of the feature made sense within the context of that game.

There may be a few here, but the majority of us are not complaining due to the no loot aspect, its because there was the change TO the no loot aspect.

ME2 is a great RPG-lite game if you ignore everything that ME1 brought to the table.
ME2 ignores its roots, and frankly, it pisses many of us off. Yes we all seriously dislike ME1 loot system (way too much junk loot); but we feel it could have been improved upon, not removed.

Thats what these debates are; "did Bioware go to far?" Many of us say "hell yes" Bioware did. They took the easy way out.

And my signature does go with what Christina Norman stated in her storyboard; build an FPS first, add on RPG elements after.

Modifié par Murmillos, 16 mars 2010 - 12:17 .

[Jebel Krong]

Murmillos wrote...

flem1 wrote...

Bio isn't going to bring back the stupid loot management minigame that's weighed down every previous RPG for ME3, are they?

ME2 was wonderful in its purity. Just need more appearance options.

We dont want a stupid loot system like ME1, but we don't want the no-loot system that ME2 has either.  Thats what the debate is; trying to find that balance in just what is that worthwhile number of weapons/upgrades/loot that still provides the satisfaction of gaining loot, while never taking away from the gameplay or bogging down the system/immerstion by carring 20 armors, 100 weapons by the end of every mission.

As I've suggested; keep the weapons as they are now, but instead of the generic boring +10% upgrades, the better versions of the weapons are randomly scattered for you to find; and the upgrade process works just as passively as it does now.  If you find a better weapon version of the weapon you are carrying, you and everybody else whom used that same weapon gets the upgrade too. If you are not using that weapon, its up to you to choose to then use it there.. or carry it back to the Normandy for the squad members whom do. Again, because you'll only find 1 to 3 upgrades per world, its a realistic approach of the number of upgrades you could find and carry with you. Not the magical endless bag of loot [ or at least 150 items] that ME1 had.  Once the new version is aquired and replicated to everybody in the squad, all old versions are gone - result, no micromanaging.

This brings back the feeling of getting loot, while never bogging down the system of having to micro manage the weapons.

The same could be done to armor peices.  You find armor pieces randomly in the world, starting with "headshot visor +3%", but by the end of the game, getting "headshot visor +15%".

If you are wearing it headshot visor, you automatically upgrade to the better found version, if not, it auto-replaces the lesser version - for you to choose to use at a later time.

ok that's not bad, but again i do have a problem with the "finding magically better items on x random world" mechanic. i would like to see it limited to worlds/missions where it is likely you might find better gear - i can imagine places like the citadel (SPECTRE HQ), Omega and some research labs in the lawless traverses (hahne kedar facility, synthetic insights labs etc), and geth bases having advanced tech laying about, but korlan? tuchunka? random merc bases? no way is that believable.

[Terror_K]

Murmillos wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

Here's a mock-up I made of the basic thing I would have liked to have seen for ME2 and would like to see for ME3:-

I like what I see here.. but for the stat Penetration; its a bit ambiguous/unclear.  But I don't have a clear idea at the moment is now to make it work.  I just know from looking at it - I wouldn't know what it would mean.  I know what penetration is and how it works within ME2, but not how it would be indicated by a clear easy stat; or as a numerical stat.

To be honest, I simply stole the bars from Christina's slide that inspired me to do the mock-up in the first place... I didn't really put a lot of thought into things beyond that (they're probably not even accurate for the weapon shown at all either!) I just put them there to represent the statistical bars I felt ME2 was missing and needed. 

[Catsith]

Terror_K wrote...

Here's a mock-up I made of the basic thing I would have liked to have seen for ME2 and would like to see for ME3:-

Please consider something like this for ME3, Christina. All the great shooters have stat screens like that. You can easily see how powerful a weapon is, compare it to currently equipped, etc. It's nice to have weapons that feel different, but we want to see the numbers too, not just a line that reads "this gun is good against shields" in the description window.
The above example is a perfect mix of interfaces from ME1 and ME2, both sleek and informative. Keep something like that, multiply the arsenal, have upgrades shown directly on the weapons instead of a separate screen, and I think it'll be perfect.

[Jebel Krong]

Murmillos wrote...

And my signature does go with what Christina Norman stated in her storyboard; build an FPS first, add on RPG elements after.

what she actually said - and BW meant - and what is in your signature are two very different things, and you know it.

of course BW were aiming to improve the shooter aspects - they were one of the weaker parts of the first game. that doesn't mean they didn't refine the rpg aspects too, though, or gave them less attention. ok, yeah maybe they made some mistakes, but at leats they are trying new things and not just filling out rpg tick-boxes...

[Jebel Krong]

scyphozoa wrote...

the bars look good and make it feel more rpgy. i can dig it

adding a few bars makes it an rpg now? this is exactly what i'm arguing against: the bars mean nothing, they could say anything, because all that info is still in the game as it stands now, only terror_k put a picture and bar-chart on the equipment screen it suddenly becomes something else?!

[Murmillos]

Jebel Krong wrote...

scyphozoa wrote...

the bars look good and make it feel more rpgy. i can dig it

adding a few bars makes it an rpg now? this is exactly what i'm arguing against: the bars mean nothing, they could say anything, because all that info is still in the game as it stands now, only terror_k put a picture and bar-chart on the equipment screen it suddenly becomes something else?!

You fail at reading and comprehension.