874 réponses à ce sujet

[JKoopman]

JKoopman wrote...

I grow very tired of the "I'd rather have no inventory than the broken inventory of ME1" remarks. It seems like the supporters of the changes in ME2 approach it with the same "all or nothing" attitude to which BioWare approached ME2. Why does it have to be no inventory or a broken inventory? Why can't we have *gasp* an improved inventory? Why does everything always have to be black or white?

I don't think anyone here is advocating that a broken inventory or broken loot system or broken anything be implemented in ME2/ME3. What we scratch our heads about is why those "broken" features were simply stripped from the game rather than fixed as we all assumed they would be. After all, I'd rather have a working inventory than a broken inventory or no inventory at all.

It not like it's impossible to make an inventory or loot system that works while still being intuitive and easy to use. Other games have done it.

Inventory
Give us an option to sort by name/type/rank/etc, make identicle items stack and give us an "omni-gel all" button. This alone would have instantly solved almost every problem with item clutter in ME1.

Loot
Shrink the loot table from 10 ranks per item to 5 ranks or even 3 ranks, make the stat difference between ranks more pronounced to compensate and reduce the number of drops per encounter so you don't get overwhelmed by loot with every battle. Again, that alone would've instantly eliminated the complaints of "I hate having to omni-gel items for 10 minutes after each mission" that people constantly throw around.

Ammo (eg "A way to restrict and limit the over-use of singular weapon types")
Make ammo slowly regenerate just like health does now. The in-game explanation would be that the weapons still use thermal clips, but as the clips cool down over time they get re-added to the player's ammo pool. This would give players all the essence of an ammo and reloading mechanic and limit the over-use of one particular weapon without the "WTF why don't my weapons ever cool down!?" lore/physics-breaking idiocy and thermal clip scavenger hunts.

Wow, look at that. I just solved the 3 major problems with ME2 in about 10 minutes. Are they perfect? Probably not. But with focus groups and several months for testing they could be made to work, and it goes to show you that it doesn't have to be a case of "broken system or no system."

I'd like to add an alternate to the ammo category: batteries.

The way weapons work as described in the codex is that the weapon computer compensates for range, wind velocity, etc, shaves off an appropriately-sized slug from the metal ammo block inside the weapon, then a mass effect field generator temporarily reduces the mass of that slug while the magnetic mass accelerator rails in the barrel accelerate the slug to a velocity of several kilometers per second.

What all 3 of those have in common is that they each require electricity to function (and in the case of the later 2, massive amounts of it).

Replace thermal clips with battery packs and replace the ammo thermal clip counter with a charge meter and presto, you have a system that functions in an identicle manner but that doesn't conflict with existing lore, require a hackneyed "adapted geth technology" explanation or defy the laws of thermodynamics (eg a thermal clip should logically cool down over time whereas a battery wouldn't magically regain charge).

I can't understand how, with months and months of development time and access to professional writers, focus groups as well as all relevant codex material, the current thermal clip system could've been given the green light. It's so easy to come up with better systems and explanations that don't insult the intelligence of existing ME fans...

Modifié par JKoopman, 16 mars 2010 - 06:02 .

[A Fhaol Bhig]

Lvl20DM wrote...

It looks like they are planning on implementing more RPG features into the next game. This makes sense - they basically started over with ME 2 (as shown in the slides). The concerns cited by Norman in her presentation should be a good sign for those that felt that too few RPG features were included in ME 2.

For ME 3, I like the idea of "loot" being more like it is in ME 2, though actually finding more interesting upgrades would be nice. Finding suits of armor or pieces (other than on vendors) would also make sense. Picking over corpses to the degree you do in some RPG's just doesn't fit with the setting, though.

Making the classes more customizable would be nice. They did a good job of differentiating the classes, but two Engineers tend to play pretty similar to one another. Adding in Specializations like in Dragon age, skill/power trees and that kind of thing would be a good move, I think. While I liked the class power, it seemed like everybody would max that one out. It gave lots of good, static bonuses. In ME 3, they could allow you to make two Engineers as different as a two warriors can be in a game like Dragon Age. As in, some powers would only be available to certain "builds" of those classes. It would be harder to balance, but at this point they don't need to worry about building the combat system and can simply focus on adding more complexity to the game.

The class skill in ME 2 kind of ties into my second point. It is very good, and I imagine that most players max that one out. Maybe some of those benefits (increased health, weapon damage, and so on) should automatically increase as you level.

I would rather find a upgrade for Increased power, then five varients for upgraded power.

[Murmillos]

incinerator950 wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

In the off chance that Bioware is considering returning to an "loot grinding" inventory system or a "hybrid" regenerating ammo system:
I'd like to point out that the people making such suggestions also believe that turn-based combat isn't obsolete.

WE DO NOT WANT A LOOT GRINDING INVENTORY SYSTEM.. WE DO NOT WANT BIOWARE TO GO BACK TO A LOOT GRINDING INVENTORY SYSTEM..

why can't you understand this?

Obsolete or not, it's refreshing when games like this do something else.  That being said, I've only beaten KOTOR 1/2, ME 1 and 2 only around 4-6 times each, where as games like Morrowind and Oblivion I've beaten over 14 times each, and games like Champions ON or RtA I've beaten 10 times over.  

It's people's playstyle, if you don't like what you have, go return it, and get a new game, or if you pirated it, then don't complain because you don't have any right to complain about something you got for free.

So you are saying that loot or inventory should never be withheld?  That all weapons/loot/inventory should be given to the player at the start of the game? Knowing that all items they start out with will be all the items they will see/playwith thru the entire game?

[incinerator950]

Murmillos wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

In the off chance that Bioware is considering returning to an "loot grinding" inventory system or a "hybrid" regenerating ammo system:
I'd like to point out that the people making such suggestions also believe that turn-based combat isn't obsolete.

WE DO NOT WANT A LOOT GRINDING INVENTORY SYSTEM.. WE DO NOT WANT BIOWARE TO GO BACK TO A LOOT GRINDING INVENTORY SYSTEM..

why can't you understand this?

Obsolete or not, it's refreshing when games like this do something else.  That being said, I've only beaten KOTOR 1/2, ME 1 and 2 only around 4-6 times each, where as games like Morrowind and Oblivion I've beaten over 14 times each, and games like Champions ON or RtA I've beaten 10 times over.  

It's people's playstyle, if you don't like what you have, go return it, and get a new game, or if you pirated it, then don't complain because you don't have any right to complain about something you got for free.

So you are saying that loot or inventory should never be withheld?  That all weapons/loot/inventory should be given to the player at the start of the game? Knowing that all items they start out with will be all the items they will see/playwith thru the entire game?

Loot grinding is repetitive, and gets moreso when you jot down where they are in your head.  Also, now you're complaining about ME 1 too, which wasn't any better than now.  Also, having all the weapons in the game doesn't make it much easier.

Not saying it's bad, but I'm getting sick of every game adhering to the same defining measure of other games.  Like RPG fanatics who thinks every Tabletop RPG has to be like Shadowrun or DND, or it's not worth mentioning, or that one game's background will be superior to every other goddamn game, even when the other game has a drastic turn around and possibly funner time playing.

System's not broken, but this isn't fixing it, just doing something different.

[Murmillos]

incinerator950 wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

In the off chance that Bioware is considering returning to an "loot grinding" inventory system or a "hybrid" regenerating ammo system:
I'd like to point out that the people making such suggestions also believe that turn-based combat isn't obsolete.

WE DO NOT WANT A LOOT GRINDING INVENTORY SYSTEM.. WE DO NOT WANT BIOWARE TO GO BACK TO A LOOT GRINDING INVENTORY SYSTEM..

why can't you understand this?

Obsolete or not, it's refreshing when games like this do something else.  That being said, I've only beaten KOTOR 1/2, ME 1 and 2 only around 4-6 times each, where as games like Morrowind and Oblivion I've beaten over 14 times each, and games like Champions ON or RtA I've beaten 10 times over.  

It's people's playstyle, if you don't like what you have, go return it, and get a new game, or if you pirated it, then don't complain because you don't have any right to complain about something you got for free.

So you are saying that loot or inventory should never be withheld?  That all weapons/loot/inventory should be given to the player at the start of the game? Knowing that all items they start out with will be all the items they will see/playwith thru the entire game?

Loot grinding is repetitive, and gets moreso when you jot down where they are in your head.  Also, now you're complaining about ME 1 too, which wasn't any better than now.  Also, having all the weapons in the game doesn't make it much easier.

Not saying it's bad, but I'm getting sick of every game adhering to the same defining measure of other games.  Like RPG fanatics who thinks every Tabletop RPG has to be like Shadowrun or DND, or it's not worth mentioning, or that one game's background will be superior to every other goddamn game, even when the other game has a drastic turn around and possibly funner time playing.

System's not broken, but this isn't fixing it, just doing something different.

Yea.. thats what we are all saying.. Loot grinding sucks.. but not having any sense of loot sucks just as much too. 

ME1 system sucks.. ME2 system sucks on the complete other end of the spectrum. 

What many of us want.. and are debating here, is trying to help Bioware find that middle ground that strikes that happy medium of given players the resemblance of loot, while not bogging down the system of having to grind for it, nor the tedium of having to deal with it.  Keeping it semi random, clean, realistic yet still rewarding.

ME2 system requires you to KNOW where the weapon upgrades are.  If you are a Vangard - you WANT to know where all the shotgun upgrades are.

[incinerator950]

Murmillos wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Murmillos wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

In the off chance that Bioware is considering returning to an "loot grinding" inventory system or a "hybrid" regenerating ammo system:
I'd like to point out that the people making such suggestions also believe that turn-based combat isn't obsolete.

WE DO NOT WANT A LOOT GRINDING INVENTORY SYSTEM.. WE DO NOT WANT BIOWARE TO GO BACK TO A LOOT GRINDING INVENTORY SYSTEM..

why can't you understand this?

Obsolete or not, it's refreshing when games like this do something else.  That being said, I've only beaten KOTOR 1/2, ME 1 and 2 only around 4-6 times each, where as games like Morrowind and Oblivion I've beaten over 14 times each, and games like Champions ON or RtA I've beaten 10 times over.  

It's people's playstyle, if you don't like what you have, go return it, and get a new game, or if you pirated it, then don't complain because you don't have any right to complain about something you got for free.

So you are saying that loot or inventory should never be withheld?  That all weapons/loot/inventory should be given to the player at the start of the game? Knowing that all items they start out with will be all the items they will see/playwith thru the entire game?

Loot grinding is repetitive, and gets moreso when you jot down where they are in your head.  Also, now you're complaining about ME 1 too, which wasn't any better than now.  Also, having all the weapons in the game doesn't make it much easier.

Not saying it's bad, but I'm getting sick of every game adhering to the same defining measure of other games.  Like RPG fanatics who thinks every Tabletop RPG has to be like Shadowrun or DND, or it's not worth mentioning, or that one game's background will be superior to every other goddamn game, even when the other game has a drastic turn around and possibly funner time playing.

System's not broken, but this isn't fixing it, just doing something different.

Yea.. thats what we are all saying.. Loot grinding sucks.. but not having any sense of loot sucks just as much too. 

ME1 system sucks.. ME2 system sucks on the complete other end of the spectrum. 

What many of us want.. and are debating here, is trying to help Bioware find that middle ground that strikes that happy medium of given players the resemblance of loot, while not bogging down the system of having to grind for it, nor the tedium of having to deal with it.  Keeping it semi random, clean, realistic yet still rewarding.

ME2 system requires you to KNOW where the weapon upgrades are.  If you are a Vangard - you WANT to know where all the shotgun upgrades are.

Meh, the system doesn't bug me, I must be one of the lucky ones.

[Darth Drago]

So let me get this right, they went into research mode and looked at other shooter games to fix ME1 and make ME2? Shouldn’t they have done that when they made ME1 in the first place? So like are they going to research RPG games now to “fix” that for ME3? At this rate of thought maybe by then we’ll get the game ME1 should have been in the first place.

My faith in the Mass Effect game developers just completely got flushed down the toilet with this slideshow and prove to me that they still don’t have a clue.

[Gatt9]

Darth Drago wrote...


So let me get this right, they went into research mode and looked at other shooter games to fix ME1 and make ME2? Shouldn’t they have done that when they made ME1 in the first place? So like are they going to research RPG games now to “fix” that for ME3? At this rate of thought maybe by then we’ll get the game ME1 should have been in the first place.

My faith in the Mass Effect game developers just completely got flushed down the toilet with this slideshow and prove to me that they still don’t have a clue.

Yup,  you've got it right.  It's the exact same thing that Bethseda did with Fallout,  instead of looking at the original,  or RPG's,  they now look at Shooters for inspiration in an RPG.

It's a red-flag for an impending collapse of most major publishers.  Today there are now just two types of games,  Shooter or RTS.  Every other game is being turned into one of those two games,  and being falsely labelled as something else.

Problem is,  you can only sell the same game so many times,  and now that everyone's selling the same game...

[kregano]

Darth Drago wrote...
So let me get this right, they went into research mode and looked at other shooter games to fix ME1 and make ME2? Shouldn’t they have done that when they made ME1 in the first place? So like are they going to research RPG games now to “fix” that for ME3? At this rate of thought maybe by then we’ll get the game ME1 should have been in the first place.

My faith in the Mass Effect game developers just completely got flushed down the toilet with this slideshow and prove to me that they still don’t have a clue.

Bioware thought that they could deliver a great shooter experience on their own with ME1. The combat didn't live up to their expectations, so they decided to look at what other companies do for their shooters and used thaat to improve ME2's combat. There's nothing wrong with that. Since Bioware is pretty well versed in making RPGs, the issue for ME3 is to find the right way to implement RPG features so that the people who liked one game or the other don't feel like ME3 caters to one demographic or the other.

[baller7345]

Gatt9 wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...


So let me get this right, they went into research mode and looked at other shooter games to fix ME1 and make ME2? Shouldn’t they have done that when they made ME1 in the first place? So like are they going to research RPG games now to “fix” that for ME3? At this rate of thought maybe by then we’ll get the game ME1 should have been in the first place.

My faith in the Mass Effect game developers just completely got flushed down the toilet with this slideshow and prove to me that they still don’t have a clue.

Yup,  you've got it right.  It's the exact same thing that Bethseda did with Fallout,  instead of looking at the original,  or RPG's,  they now look at Shooters for inspiration in an RPG.

It's a red-flag for an impending collapse of most major publishers.  Today there are now just two types of games,  Shooter or RTS.  Every other game is being turned into one of those two games,  and being falsely labelled as something else.

Problem is,  you can only sell the same game so many times,  and now that everyone's selling the same game...

I found fallout 3 to be one of the most immersive and deep RPG's I've ever played.  I can barely get through the first two games since I played them second.  Nostalgia and familarity play a huge role in juding a game sometimes more than quality.  It isn't a shooter just because it has guns and is first person.  Everyone is entitled ot their own opinions but as Fallout 3 is right up there with Ocarina of Time as all time my favorite games I can't just let someone say it's not an RPG.

The RPG genre is not something that we can just put a single definition on because Role Playing Game in genreal doesn't say what the gameplay consists of other than letting you play the role of a character.  You can have elements that you think belong but in the end you can's something isn't a RPG because it isn't what you wanted it to be.  Well I guess you could but it wouldn't be a fact it would simply be an opinion.

Modifié par baller7345, 16 mars 2010 - 07:42 .

[Darth Drago]

Gatt9 wrote...

Yup, you've got it right. It's the exact same thing that Bethseda did with Fallout, instead of looking at the original, or RPG's, they now look at Shooters for inspiration in an RPG.

It's a red-flag for an impending collapse of most major publishers. Today there are now just two types of games, Shooter or RTS. Every other game is being turned into one of those two games, and being falsely labelled as something else.

Problem is, you can only sell the same game so many times, and now that everyone's selling the same game...

-Fallout 3 did the game right as far as I’m concerned. Bethesda had everything worked out just fine when it was released with a game that had combat, loot, lots of voice dialog and RPG elements. Funny how a company like Bethesda who is probably best known for their fantasy role playing games can make the jump to what could be listed as a sci-fi RPG without screwing over their customers with so many drastic changes.

kregano wrote...

Bioware thought that they could deliver a great shooter experience on their own with ME1. The combat didn't live up to their expectations, so they decided to look at what other companies do for their shooters and used thaat to improve ME2's combat. There's nothing wrong with that. Since Bioware is pretty well versed in making RPGs, the issue for ME3 is to find the right way to implement RPG features so that the people who liked one game or the other don't feel like ME3 caters to one demographic or the other.

-Unfortunately the damage is already done. All the people who cant stand most or some of the drastic changes made to make ME2 probably wont get ME3 until they rent it at the very least. The shooter fan base that ME2 has now will likely be pissed off if they go out and get ME3 to find its no longer a complete shooter game. BioWare spent to much time focusing on the combat that they butchered or dropped completely what made ME1 good instead of fixing those issues.

[WillieStyle]

Darth Drago wrote...
-Unfortunately the damage is already done. All the people who cant stand most or some of the drastic changes made to make ME2 probably wont get ME3 until they rent it at the very least. The shooter fan base that ME2 has now will likely be pissed off if they go out and get ME3 to find its no longer a complete shooter game. BioWare spent to much time focusing on the combat that they butchered or dropped completely what made ME1 good instead of fixing those issues.

Hahaha!
You're on the ME2 message board complaining about how much you hate it months after its release. You are emotionally invested in the franchise.  Just like all those folks who claimed they'd boycott MW2, your bark is bigger than your bite.

I'll bet my mortgage that you'll buy ME3 the week it's released.

Modifié par WillieStyle, 16 mars 2010 - 09:28 .

[JKoopman]

WillieStyle wrote...

Darth Drago wrote...
-Unfortunately the damage is already done. All the people who cant stand most or some of the drastic changes made to make ME2 probably wont get ME3 until they rent it at the very least. The shooter fan base that ME2 has now will likely be pissed off if they go out and get ME3 to find its no longer a complete shooter game. BioWare spent to much time focusing on the combat that they butchered or dropped completely what made ME1 good instead of fixing those issues.

Hahaha!
You're on the ME2 message board complaining about how much you hate it months after its release. You are emotionally invested in the franchise.  Just like all those folks who claimed they'd boycott MW2, your bark is bigger than your bite.

I'll bet my mortgage that you'll buy ME3 the week it's released.

Being invested in a community or franchise and passionately arguing for it's improvement doesn't mean that all those who feel burned by BioWare's new direction won't take precautions against being burned again. It's certainly made me think twice about purchasing ME3 unless the devs make clear their intentions for the project, and I certainly won't be pre-ordering it like I did ME2.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Also, you're sounding a bit like an **** there.

[WillieStyle]

Look, I've been in your shoes. I hated the original NWN. I complained on the NWN forums for ages. But you know what, I bought Jade Empire. I bought KOTOR. I bought ME1 and Dragon Age and ME2.

On the other hand, I bought Oblivion and hated it. I didn't spend a single second complaining on the Oblivion forums. I just threw the DVD in the trash and went on with my life.



As a developer, it isn't the folks on the forums complaining about how much they hate the game you have to worry about. It's the ones who don't even bother to complain.

[TJSolo]

WillieStyle wrote...

Look, I've been in your shoes. I hated the original NWN. I complained on the NWN forums for ages. But you know what, I bought Jade Empire. I bought KOTOR. I bought ME1 and Dragon Age and ME2.
On the other hand, I bought Oblivion and hated it. I didn't spend a single second complaining on the Oblivion forums. I just threw the DVD in the trash and went on with my life.

As a developer, it isn't the folks on the forums complaining about how much they hate the game you have to worry about. It's the ones who don't even bother to complain.

Maybe you were the wrong market for Oblivion. A market Beth isn't or can't attract with a game like Oblivion.
Now about franchises, yes customer retention matters. Complaints from customers matter.
It is possible for customers to become so dismayed with a franchise as to not buy from it again.
Proven money earned and lost by not retaining.

[WillieStyle]

TJSolo wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

Look, I've been in your shoes. I hated the original NWN. I complained on the NWN forums for ages. But you know what, I bought Jade Empire. I bought KOTOR. I bought ME1 and Dragon Age and ME2.
On the other hand, I bought Oblivion and hated it. I didn't spend a single second complaining on the Oblivion forums. I just threw the DVD in the trash and went on with my life.

As a developer, it isn't the folks on the forums complaining about how much they hate the game you have to worry about. It's the ones who don't even bother to complain.

Maybe you were the wrong market for Oblivion. A market Beth isn't or can't attract with a game like Oblivion.
Now about franchises, yes customer retention matters. Complaints from customers matter.
It is possible for customers to become so dismayed with a franchise as to not buy from it again.
Proven money earned and lost by not retaining.

My point is, the customer who walks away and doesn't buy anymore games isn't the one complaining on the forums. He's the one who isn't complaining on the forums any longer.

[baller7345]

TJSolo wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

Look, I've been in your shoes. I hated the original NWN. I complained on the NWN forums for ages. But you know what, I bought Jade Empire. I bought KOTOR. I bought ME1 and Dragon Age and ME2.
On the other hand, I bought Oblivion and hated it. I didn't spend a single second complaining on the Oblivion forums. I just threw the DVD in the trash and went on with my life.

As a developer, it isn't the folks on the forums complaining about how much they hate the game you have to worry about. It's the ones who don't even bother to complain.

Maybe you were the wrong market for Oblivion. A market Beth isn't or can't attract with a game like Oblivion.
Now about franchises, yes customer retention matters. Complaints from customers matter.
It is possible for customers to become so dismayed with a franchise as to not buy from it again.
Proven money earned and lost by not retaining.

This does very much matter but only if there is a large enough outcry.  With mass effect 2 this simply is not the case because only a portion of these forums actually have a major problem with the game and they represent the minority of the minority since everyone on this forum is a very small percentage of the people who bought the game. 

EDIT: 
Other people can have problems with it outside of these forums but they still are in the minority so  until the majority of the fan based is displeased you won't see a major decrease in sells.

Modifié par baller7345, 16 mars 2010 - 10:00 .

[Murmillos]

-

Modifié par Murmillos, 16 mars 2010 - 10:08 .

[TJSolo]

baller7345 wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

Look, I've been in your shoes. I hated the original NWN. I complained on the NWN forums for ages. But you know what, I bought Jade Empire. I bought KOTOR. I bought ME1 and Dragon Age and ME2.
On the other hand, I bought Oblivion and hated it. I didn't spend a single second complaining on the Oblivion forums. I just threw the DVD in the trash and went on with my life.

As a developer, it isn't the folks on the forums complaining about how much they hate the game you have to worry about. It's the ones who don't even bother to complain.

Maybe you were the wrong market for Oblivion. A market Beth isn't or can't attract with a game like Oblivion.
Now about franchises, yes customer retention matters. Complaints from customers matter.
It is possible for customers to become so dismayed with a franchise as to not buy from it again.
Proven money earned and lost by not retaining.

This does very much matter but only if there is a large enough outcry.  With mass effect 2 this simply is not the case because only a portion of these forums actually have a major problem with the game and they represent the minority of the minority since everyone on this forum is a very small percentage of the people who bought the game. 

EDIT: 
Other people can have problems with it outside of these forums but they still are in the minority so  until the majority of the fan based is displeased you won't see a major decrease in sells.

The forums is a sampling size of customers. Accurate enough for BW to listen to them and have influences over ME1 to 2 changes.
Claiming minority is inferior to majority is harsh as seeing the minority still has a say and still are effectively customers.
It really depends on the issue a poll covers as to who even the minority is and you can't even qualify if the people voting on polls have even played both games.

[baller7345]

TJSolo wrote...

baller7345 wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

WillieStyle wrote...

Look, I've been in your shoes. I hated the original NWN. I complained on the NWN forums for ages. But you know what, I bought Jade Empire. I bought KOTOR. I bought ME1 and Dragon Age and ME2.
On the other hand, I bought Oblivion and hated it. I didn't spend a single second complaining on the Oblivion forums. I just threw the DVD in the trash and went on with my life.

As a developer, it isn't the folks on the forums complaining about how much they hate the game you have to worry about. It's the ones who don't even bother to complain.

Maybe you were the wrong market for Oblivion. A market Beth isn't or can't attract with a game like Oblivion.
Now about franchises, yes customer retention matters. Complaints from customers matter.
It is possible for customers to become so dismayed with a franchise as to not buy from it again.
Proven money earned and lost by not retaining.

This does very much matter but only if there is a large enough outcry.  With mass effect 2 this simply is not the case because only a portion of these forums actually have a major problem with the game and they represent the minority of the minority since everyone on this forum is a very small percentage of the people who bought the game. 

EDIT: 
Other people can have problems with it outside of these forums but they still are in the minority so  until the majority of the fan based is displeased you won't see a major decrease in sells.

The forums is a sampling size of customers. Accurate enough for BW to listen to them and have influences over ME1 to 2 changes.
Claiming minority is inferior to majority is harsh as seeing the minority still has a say and still are effectively customers.
It really depends on the issue a poll covers as to who even the minority is and you can't even qualify if the people voting on polls have even played both games.

You can't really say we are the average customer because we aren't the average game buying customer.  They can take our advice on gameplay and implement what they see fit but as for a representation of sales we are a terrible sample since the the average customer that buys video games is not us.  We would like to think we are the majority of the gaming community but we simply aren't.  A large amount of people who buy games don't do any research on what the game is they simply look at the box.  It doesn't matter how much we stop buying the game we won't have enough of an impact to hurt boware's sales.  However we do have a say in what could be improved even if it is considerable less than what we would like.

[AngryFrozenWater]

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:-

Wow. I really would love to see that. This is what the old inventory system was good at. It gave you relevant information. It allowed you to make a choice based on that. Now I have to guess what item is better. If the mod selection also modifies the stats shown then it would be near perfect.

Another thing that I liked about the old inventory was that you were able to compare the new selection with the current items chosen. That also worked in shops, BTW. Maybe the stat bars in your screen could split in green and red bars. Green meaning current configuration and red the new selection. Just brain storming.

[A Fhaol Bhig]

AngryFrozenWater 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:-

Wow. I really would love to see that. This is what the old inventory system was good at. It gave you relevant information. It allowed you to make a choice based on that. Now I have to guess what item is better. If the mod selection also modifies the stats shown then it would be near perfect.

Another thing that I liked about the old inventory was that you were able to compare the new selection with the current items chosen. That also worked in shops, BTW. Maybe the stat bars in your screen could split in green and red bars. Green meaning current configuration and red the new selection. Just brain storming.

ME2 had it right when it uncluttered things, and (while their was obviously WAY to much) ME1 had it right with the way you were able to mod the weapons and armour.

This is pretty much what I have in mind.

[jgordon11]

^

Like above, keep inventories out of ME3 just have an increased upgrading/customization like the current system, but with more options and not a linear upgrading system.

[Chala]

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:-

hey bioware why don't you take a look at this?: a normal guy had found a better weapon upgrade system, something that you "professionals" can't do