874 réponses à ce sujet

[slyguy07]

Yeah I will back up Terror K on this...I don't have to patience to actually be serious and put up with the know-it-alls and people who demand we play by philosophy 101 rules even when factual evidence is presented, but it sure was fun poking someone on here for a few times. Oh me lol I just crack up thinking about it. Anyhow Pocket you did a good job of debating while I was doing that and you was being serious. I applaud your patience, but I'm sure you noticed it wasn't you I was poking.

[Mimaiselphenai]

Pocketgb wrote...

Dudeman315 wrote...

This is not the case for ME2. Most(not all) were personal mission for your party that did not enhance the universe as a whole(not all). And since your party only talked to you to give the quest and then stopped, even that felt unrewarding.

That's part of the progression of the trilogy. The first was all about expand your knowledge of the franchise. The second assumes you now know what's up, and you're given a mission (that, quite honestly, sounds really impossible) and you're gonna need the best at their best to do it.

And I'm not sure what you mean about you're party not talking to you when you did their quest. Have you spoken to Thane much??

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

It doesn't. You actually have to
press against a wall to use cover in 1. It's independant of the sprint
key bind.

Precisely. And if you're running away, and
there are any walls perpindicular to you, you have a chance to "stick"
to it - which had a pretty good chance of getting you killed, just like
in ME2. That's the point I'M trying to make here.

There is a bit of a difference in the range it takes to
get into cover, though, and in ME1 you had to be closer to use it, in
ME2 you can be a bit further away before you can take cover. However,
this makes it much more easier to advance to further cover.

Mimaiselphenai
wrote...

And my point is, even if it did happen in one, there
was no slide animation. If you "accidentally" used cover, you could just
break away again. In 2 you have to survive the slide animation into
cover you don't want to use before that's even an option. Hence it
shouldn't be on the same key binding.

The answer to solve
both problems in ME1 AND 2 is have the sprint
key indepenant of the take cover key. They can do this by making the
left thumbstick (which was originally crouch, which doesn't exist in the
game) the sprint button.

I never said it couldn't apply to 1, but this is more a hope for a change in 3, so I don't get why you keep trying to make a comparison. Especially since it's far more glaring in 2. It never once got me killed 1 since you had to be pretty much hugging a wall to get "stuck" while running away. Maybe it's more of an issue for XBOX users than PC, but I wouldn't know. I already said twice that I don't dislike the slide feature, just that it should require...effort. Not only does simplifying everything cause the above mentioned issues, but it makes combat less engaging.

Modifié par Mimaiselphenai, 23 mars 2010 - 01:43 .

[Pocketgb]

slyguy07 wrote...

As for stat systems I was mainly referring to seeing weapon stats and damage protection like in the first game as well as biotic/tech protection. I am not even sure some of those resistances are even in the game anymore. I was actually saying the N7 armor was very much in the RPG realm with it's level of customization I was just saying I disliked the fact that the bonuses they provide didn't really change anything.

10% more health could mean an extra kill as a Vanguard before you have to retreat back to safety. 10% quicker shield recharge allows you to get back in the action quicker after getting pummeled. 10% more weapon damage can add up pretty quickly. In the longhaul these things make a big difference, and that was the point: subtle, but effective.

In regards to stats with weapons and the like? I found it pretty pointless in ME1 since you weren't given any indication how much health or armor an enemy had, nor was it really told how damage was calculated when it went up against armor.

slyguy07 wrote...

As for the inventory it can provide the simple need to feel like you keep gaining something as you go through the game. Material progression. It can add a sense of immersion if done right. Unfortunately ME1 was far from this. I am interested to see how BW approaches this in ME3. Finding upgrades or say the OSD on a merc for example and hacking it can lead to a hidden weapons cache side mission. I am just saying it doesn't always have to be gear driven. Getting better gear is part of what inventories do provide in games, but that shouldn't be the only thing. Customizing your gear "makes it your own" if it has enough depth and can add to the immersion. Like the N7 armor did with it's paint schemes and patterns.

Bringing back an inventory for the sake of a gear progression would be a really, really bad idea. For me it really would kill the immersion: You're commander freaking Shepard, but you have to rely on the pickings of your enemies to "do better"?

You should be starting with the "best of the best", and finding different researches to customize/improve your gear would be the way to go (i.e. like ME2, but more).

Overall, I don't really feel that ME1 was "more RPG" than ME2, on the only occassion of being able to customize how your weapons performed. Everything else was a change of pace. Give our guns the same depth as our N7 armor and ME3 will be truly wicked sick.

slyguy07 wrote...

Anyhow Pocket you did a good job of debating while I was doing that and
you was being serious. I applaud your patience, but I'm sure you noticed
it wasn't you I was poking.

You have no need to worry. What would've been bad is if instead of all the times I asked, I assumed : )

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

I already said twice that I don't dislike the slide feature, just that
it should require...effort. Not only does simplifying everything cause
the above mentioned issues, but it makes combat less engaging.

Part of the challenge in ME2 is finding which cover is best for the situation and situations to come. It's also knowing when you should retreat to different cover, or when certain cover is more exploitable against the enemy.

What does need to change is how "safe" cover is in this game. For example: even if one of my body parts is exposed against an enemy, I won't take damage. Either that needs to change, or cover needs to degrade.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 23 mars 2010 - 01:55 .

[Mimaiselphenai]

Pocketgb wrote...



Part of the challenge in ME2 is finding which cover is best for the situation and situations to come. It's also knowing when you should retreat to different cover, or when certain cover is more exploitable against the enemy.

What does need to change is how "safe" cover is in this game. For example: even if one of my body parts is exposed against an enemy, I won't take damage. Either that needs to change, or cover needs to degrade.

Agreed, but personally I just don't like when combat aspects of a game are oversimplified. In an MMO while killing mobs? Sure. In a single player game where I'm looking for engaging fights? No. When everything is "streamlined" I just feel like I'm going through the paces. In most situations in ME2 even on Insanity, you can sprint blindly into a room and find cover without taking your fingers off of the spacebar and W (or whatever your bindings are). No effort involved until an enemy tries to flank you, which is rare.

[lastpawn]

Pocketgb wrote...

thompsonaf wrote...

I don't miss the mess that was ME1's loot system but I do miss tricking out my Spectre X Assault rifle with mods. Rail Extension VII x2 + High Explosive Rounds X on my shotgun was insane. Rounds from that gun would rocket geth into space. Armor would be nice to have back as well, Miranda/Jacob/Thane/Jack all look ridiculous running around a battlefield in their t-shirts.

I wouldn't mind seeing their clothing get more of an armored or battle-hardened appearance, but it was pretty cool to see them in unique suits. It did much to help them as a character, and I can't ever imagine Jack being the same if she was decked-out in any form of armor.

I guess we'll have to disagree because I actually laughed when I saw Jack running around almost naked through a near-vacuum, freezing, toxic environment with just some sort of breathing mask. Or seeing Miranda run through jungle in high heels. 

My suggestion is to provide each non-Shepard character with a unique battle-outfit. This would keep diversity while supporting our suspension of disbelief.

[Pocketgb]

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

Agreed, but personally I just don't like when combat aspects of a game are oversimplified. In an MMO while killing mobs? Sure. In a single player game where I'm looking for engaging fights? No. When everything is "streamlined" I just feel like I'm going through the paces. In most situations in ME2 even on Insanity, you can sprint blindly into a room and find cover without taking your fingers off of the spacebar and W (or whatever your bindings are). No effort involved until an enemy tries to flank you, which is rare.

Before I say anything, what would you rather see get changed?

thompsonaf
wrote...

I
guess we'll have to disagree because I actually laughed when I saw Jack
running around almost naked through a near-vacuum, freezing, toxic
environment with just some sort of breathing mask. Or seeing Miranda run
through jungle in high heels. 

My suggestion is to provide each
non-Shepard character with a unique battle-outfit. This would keep
diversity while supporting our suspension of disbelief.

It helps her aesthetic. Things get problematic when you're in places like the collector ship, but I simply wretch whenever I try to imagine Jack in - *shudder* - light armor.

Giving them suits for these areas would not be out of the question.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 23 mars 2010 - 03:03 .

[Mimaiselphenai]

Pocketgb wrote...


Before I say anything, what would you rather see get changed?

Already mentioned that a few times. Sprint and cover on separate keys. Not only would it eliminate any problems with getting "stuck," but it'd add to your actions in combat requiring more conscious effort if you had to time your slide. Dunno how more clear I can be.

[R0cket Surge0n]

I've given up hope. Every game is made for consoles these days so I've already said goodbye to inventory systems like in Morrowind, completely diverse missions/quests, tactical fps games like brothers in arms etc. etc. It's all get 10 of 10 here and 5 of 5 there, here's a radar to point you to the right place to go at all times, etc. etc.



I'm just glad a game like this comes along every now and then and makes up for the lack off all this with solid story and some new concepts.

[Pocketgb]

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

Already mentioned that a few times. Sprint and cover on separate keys. Not only would it eliminate any problems with getting "stuck," but it'd add to your actions in combat requiring more conscious effort if you had to time your slide. Dunno how more clear I can be.

"Time your 'slide'"? What???

The "skill" and "challenge" in ME2 shouldn't be in trying to wrestle with the environment. It should be in mowing down the opposition with as little harm done to you as possible. It should be killing the enemy with utmost effeciency. It should be about knowing what can kill you, about knowing when a certain situation is going to hit the fan, and whether or not it would be a good idea to either stick with where you are or try to find a better spot. Movement and taking cover is more streamlined for the same reason that strategy games implement more and more features to provide more control to your units, or that RPG games are providing "tactics" akin to seen what's in Dragon Age and FF12 (and if RPGs ain't doing this, they should!!)

The overall gameplay in ME2 is still leaps better than what ME1 possessed (immunity up, stand anywhere, kill bad guys, next area), but could still do with a bit more franticness.

[Mimaiselphenai]

Pocketgb wrote...


"Time your 'slide'"? What???

The "skill" and "challenge" in ME2 shouldn't be in trying to wrestle with the environment. It should be in mowing down the opposition with as little harm done to you as possible. It should be killing the enemy with utmost effeciency. It should be about knowing what can kill you, about knowing when a certain situation is going to hit the fan, and whether or not it would be a good idea to either stick with where you are or try to find a better spot. Movement and taking cover is more streamlined for the same reason that strategy games implement more and more features to provide more control to your units, or that RPG games are providing "tactics" akin to seen what's in Dragon Age and FF12 (and if RPGs ain't doing this, they should!!)

The overall gameplay in ME2 is still leaps better than what ME1 possessed (immunity up, stand anywhere, kill bad guys, next area), but could still do with a bit more franticness.

You're missing the point. The MAIN reason to keep sprint and cover off of the same key is to keep from getting stuck on the environment when you don't want to. Anything else is just a perk. And sorry to burst your bubble, but there's very little strategy involved in ME2. If the biggest crutch in the game was less "streamlined" and actually required timed execution in SOME facility rather than being pretty much automated, it'd make for a more involved combat experience in my opinion. You can agree or disagree all you like, because it was never my intention to debate it.

[Pocketgb]

Mimaiselphenai wrote...

And sorry to burst your bubble...

See previous post, apply emphasis on "should".

It might not be the most challenging game in the world, but it's still possibly the most challenging Bioware game since the Baldur's Gate series. Keeping things this interesting while upping the difficulty would be a welcome addition for ME3.

[MajesticJazz]

Very interesting article, please check it out.

Mass Effect 2 RPG or Shooter: An In Depth Look

[TJSolo]

MajesticJazz wrote...

Very interesting article, please check it out.

Mass Effect 2 RPG or Shooter: An In Depth Look

Another one of those funny reads that sheds some light on how BW planned the direction of ME2. Accompanied with a slip of the tongue by MsNorman.
“We thought that regenerating health was a nice feature to put in a shooter”
heh, shooter.
Well anyway, ME2 is done and made. My hopes for proper closure is ME3.

[MajesticJazz]

TJSolo wrote...

MajesticJazz wrote...

Very interesting article, please check it out.

Mass Effect 2 RPG or Shooter: An In Depth Look

Another one of those funny reads that sheds some light on how BW planned the direction of ME2. Accompanied with a slip of the tongue by MsNorman.
“We thought that regenerating health was a nice feature to put in a shooter”
heh, shooter.
Well anyway, ME2 is done and made. My hopes for proper closure is ME3.

I know that this comes across as shameless promotion but that is my site btw that I just gave the link to. I was there at this GDC lecture and I just now got around to doing the write up.

[Dudeman315]

Excellent and well thought out.

Modifié par Dudeman315, 24 mars 2010 - 12:40 .

[Pocketgb]

Posted a commento.

[MajesticJazz]

Thanks for the comment Pocketgb and thanks for the compliment Dudeman315.



My goal with GameZenith.com is to be hardcore. Tomorrow mourning I'm going to send a link of the article to Bioware's PR department....

[Terror_K]

I have to say, now knowing some of the things that were said I'm rather disheartened and concerned. Particularly about the leveling-up one, which as a player I felt couldn't be further from the truth, and I actually find those silly "Mission Complete" screens to be guilty of the very thing that Christina claimed ME1 was guilty of... but wasn't. That and saying that those who weren't happy with ME2 are a minority. That may be true, but that doesn't mean the minority are wrong. And when you design a game to appeal to a more mainstream audience who prefer action-oriented games and generally don't play RPGs (something that BioWare have numerous times admitted to doing when making ME2) then you'll tend to bring in a lot of new forumites who prefer the far simpler action-oriented approach, as well as no doubt drive off a lot of previous fans from the forums who were so disappointed in ME2 they simply up and left or simply don't post any more.

[UltimateRC]

My issue with ME2's inventory system wasn't that it was 'streamlined' or that you couldn't access it on missions, or that you couldn't collect as much 'loot';



Simply put, it was that you LOST functionality and customisation in the change over. Particularly pointing to the ability to upgrade/style/choose our squad mates' gear, and the ability to customise weapons.



Researching upgrades is all well and good, but its really detached from whatever you're actually upgrading. Ship, medi-gel, med-bay, armour, sheilds, weapon damage, biotics and tech abilites are all on the same terminal. 'oh, heres something I can upgrade, I will.' Theres no care for what it is, (other than maybe for a couple of extraneous upgrades you don't need). Its also a linear, only way is up deal too. In ME1 you had to make choices about whether to give a weapon a damage upgrade or an accuracy one (for example). I want to still be able to make that choice, I don't mind if I can only do that in the armoury. That'll be more natural than lugging around a hundred different suits of armour anyway.



Ugh, what I just don't get about ME2 is the way the felt they had to scrap everything and start over when many things just needed refinement.

[Revan312]

UltimateRC wrote...
*snip*

I couldn't agree more, the upgrade system is just dumb imo.  What's the point when there is no choice and your just gonna get them all anyway...

But concerning that presentation, why was story not brought into it?  That presentation keeps talking about gameplay mechanics and combat elements vs RPG elements but yet never brings up the entire point of this universe, the story, which was, and I'm sorry if I offend anyone, r.e.t.a.r.d.e.d.

I mean with all of the development being focused on building it first as a shooter and then turning on the RPG machine and deciding how to work the inventory out of existance and how to gut class customization/refine the combat etc etc etc they completely lost any semblance of a decent story.  I mean that ending, omg, that ending was so contrived as to make me not even want to finish the final boss fight. 

Really, if you cut out the ridiculous step and fetch loyalty missions from the story equation as they had nothing to do with the over-arching plot then you could sum up this game's narrative in about a paragraph, that's how shallow it was. I like to play RPG's for the story and Bioware used to be good at that, KOTOR was decent, Jade Empire was pretty good and ME1 had a great plot, but damn did DA:O and ME2 loose face on that front.  Simple is too complex of a term for ME2's plot, which was beyond disappointing to me.

My suggestion, just keep the combat mechanics the way they are now, ammo and all, try and increase the number of weapons/powers and the level of customization if possible, but please, please just stop trying to redesign the game this time and concentrate on the cinematic experience and the story.  In RPG's, plot is what gets remembered for years and years, not game mechanics so just try a bit harder on creating a fleshed out, intriguing and epic storyline rather than spending 2-3 months of dev time on whether or not you should add a fishtank into the captains quarters. /end rant

[Pocketgb]

UltimateRC wrote...

Simply put, it was that you LOST functionality and customisation in the change over. Particularly pointing to the ability to upgrade/style/choose our squad mates' gear, and the ability to customise weapons .

Only with weapon mods, but at least we get to choose different weapon loadouts. N7 armor is highly customizable.

Revan312 wrote...

Really, if you cut out the ridiculous step and fetch
loyalty missions from the story equation as they had nothing to do with
the over-arching plot then you could sum up this game's narrative in
about a paragraph, that's how shallow it was.

Complaining an apple doesn't taste like an orange isn't terribly fair to the apple seller - i.e. the whole point of ME2's story was to focus on your squadmates, . WIthout everyone at their best, without everyone's loyalty, people will die. Being sent to a hostile alien race's homeworld is no small matter, either.

Personally, it's incredibly refreshing from the plot format that nearly all of Bioware's other games have been following. KotOR did, JE did it, DA did it, ME1 did it: go through "beginning areas", be presented problem, solution to problem exists in around 4 areas, go to each area.

ME2 does things differently. You *can* cut straight to the chase when you've recruited everyone, you *can* choose to ignore their quests - but this all comes with consequence.

Modifié par Pocketgb, 24 mars 2010 - 04:48 .

[Revan312]

Pocketgb wrote...

Complaining an apple doesn't taste like an orange isn't terribly fair to the apple seller - i.e. the whole point of ME2's story was to focus on your squadmates, . WIthout everyone at their best, without everyone's loyalty, people will die. Being sent to a hostile alien race's homeworld is no small matter, either.

Personally, it's incredibly refreshing from the plot format that nearly all of Bioware's other games have been following. KotOR did, JE did it, DA did it, ME1 did it: go through "beginning areas", be presented problem, solution to problem exists in around 4 areas, go to each area.

ME2 does things differently. You *can* cut straight to the chase when you've recruited everyone, you *can* choose to ignore their quests - but this all comes with consequence.

But isn't that the point of a space opera?  An epic plot that touches all the characters in a way that makes the mere thought of asking "can you help me with my daddy issues?" seem like a cruel joke...

If I wanted to see this type of "focus" on characters I'd watch a soap opera as that's what ME2 felt like and imo it did a diservice to the actual point of the plot.  All of the loyalty missions felt superficial and forced.  I mean really, why couldn't they have made it more intuitive, i.e. I'm looking for information pertaining to the threat at hand and bump into someone from Garrus's past or while hacking a terminal about the geth's involvement with the reapers I run across information about Tali etc etc.  It could have been clever and subtle with people's loyalty but instead the game beats you over the head with an obvious mission for each member that progresses in a linear fashion until each one is "loyal".

It's all so pointless after the threat presented in the first game and feels completely out of place for such a group of supposedly amazing soldiers and experts.  What's ironic is that some of the dialogue even hangs a lantern on it like when he's talking to Samara and says he wants his crew to "keep their personal lives personal" yet that becomes the entire point of the game, that their personal lives are now yours.

Couple those feelings with the fact that the entire reason there even is a squad under your command is washed over in less time it takes to beat a flash game and it just feels underwhelming and unworthy of the potential and story that could have been with this sequal.

Like I said, the plot is what gets remembered down the line, not character vignettes that each on their own have less depth than a red shirt death in Star Trek.  I was expecting the narrative to carry over in a meaningful way as is the point of trilogies, not a fluff piece that could be cut entirely from the saga as it's plot is wrapped up almost entirely by the end of the game.  I can tell people that if you play ME3 it will pick up right where ME1 left off, that's how much this game wreaks of "spin off" imo.

I have no problem with the combat or dialogue system or even the characters themselves, I simply think the whole point of this little adventure was lost and it ended up far from the epic standards created with ME's plot.  So my suggestion still stands, leave the overall system the way it is, perhaps tweak it and expand on it a bit, but pretty much just try and concentrate on a good story because if ME doesn't have that going for it, it's just a game that mixs genres but fails at achieving excellence in any one of them.

[paperplastic]

hi all between moranda and jack i went with moranda how do i get her loyaty back for jack cuz it nomral now? so i keep useing her on my missions runs?

[Pocketgb]

Revan312 wrote...

But isn't that the point of a space opera?  An epic plot that touches all the characters in a way that makes the mere thought of asking "can you help me with my daddy issues?" seem like a cruel joke...

That's what we've been doing in every Bioware game. We've always had squadmates that had quests tied to them, and they've always been a prized part in Bioware's games.

Would this emphasis on squadmates and loyalties have fit in ME1? Hard to say, but I find it's much more fitting in ME2.

The problem that we face after the events of ME1 is that we have little to no leads on what to do against the Reapers. Then bam: you die. NOW we have a lead. The only problem is that the Collector's are some of the most sneaky, quick, subtle and effective little bastards in the universe, and the whole conflict is that we're trying to figure out what to do against them - which is obviously quite difficult, since in addition to the above that was listed they're entirely random in their selection of "victims".

So what can Shepard do in the meantime? Help his squadmates, his friends, to inspire loyalty. Regardless if they're ruthless or caring, someone who goes out of their way to do something for you is definitely an admirable trait.

The only way we can judge this different approach is opinion, and this is where things are scattered. While there are definitely those who would've wanted Bioware to remain focused on a wider story, as I said it's very refreshing to see this approach, especially when it fits in rather well with the overall theme.

Will we see this same emphasis in ME3? Hard to say, but things are starting to get to a close. Shepard's gonna need to figure out a way to convince everyone that ****'s about to hit the fan here, and I feel that'll be the main focus of ME3.

[Jebel Krong]

R0cket Surge0n wrote...

I've given up hope. Every game is made for consoles these days so I've already said goodbye to inventory systems like in Morrowind, completely diverse missions/quests, tactical fps games like brothers in arms etc. etc. It's all get 10 of 10 here and 5 of 5 there, here's a radar to point you to the right place to go at all times, etc. etc.

I'm just glad a game like this comes along every now and then and makes up for the lack off all this with solid story and some new concepts.

that is a game designer's lack of ambition or design problem, not hardware-platform problem. you can aim for the lowest common-denominator to try and include everyone, or you can aim high, and drag those same people up with you with good design - the latter obviously the preferable option and the one BW follows.

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 24 mars 2010 - 09:05 .