874 réponses à ce sujet

[Terror_K]

It's hardly any different than managing thermal clips then, is it?

[Tasker]

Meistr_Chef wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Changes were made that you didn't like. Cry more. The fact of the matter is that after a while, "looting" became pointless. Pointless! UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY POINTLESS. How many Frictionless Materials VII-IX and Inferno Rounds X did I dissolve into omni-gel that would serve no purpose but to further expediate the next safe cracking that would yield even MORE merchant trash that, in the end, yielded no less than an atrocious 6,000,000 credits by the time I finished the game? What you guys seem to want is a return to the monotony that did get chopped out, something that BioWare seems not too keen on going back to themselves.

Damn right changes were made that I didn't like, but why shouldn't I state that I didn't like them?

Yes we ended up with loads of stuff that was no use, that's one of the things that should have been looked at intelegently, rather than the blanket "Just bin it we can't be arsed." approach.

If something isn't working right, you fix it, you don't scrap it all together.

A simple solution would have been to have mods as consumables, they run out after a while and you have to install new ones.

There you go, I just thought of that now and it already solves the problem of looting too many of the same thing.

You did not solve the problem. You just made the game annoying in another sense; the need to check and replace "worn" items, which is dreary micromanaging aspect. Also, the rate of ME1 loot gain was pretty high; you'd get stuff faster than you wear them out; and if you make things wear out too quickly you run the risk of pissing the player off because his mods ran out at an unopportune time. Also, you cannot be consuming all random loot at the same rate, since you're probably consuming only your favorite items, so another hiccup; uneven wear and replace problems.

If only game design were as easy you make it out to be.

That all depends on how quickly they wear out.

If they wear out really quickly, then fair enough it's micromanagement ( which is a staple of true RPGs no matter how you look at it )

But if they wear out at a reasonable pace and automatically renew from your inventory stockpile, maybe with the corner of the HUD saying what you have equiped and how many are left, then there you go problem solved. You only have to micromanage to equip different ones.

[Tasker]

Terror_K wrote...

It's hardly any different than managing thermal clips then, is it?

Totally different.

You can go through the game and never use mods

Try doing that with thermal clips.

Mods would be a convenience not a necessity.

Modifié par Orkboy, 14 mars 2010 - 10:09 .

[Grizzly46]

One solution to the problem of inventory vs getting better items would be the simple swap. If a character can only carry say two guns no matter the type, each time the character picks up a new weapon, he has to throw away an old weapon. This has been done in numerous games, and that works very well. It also deals with ammo better: if you run out of ammo for a Garand rifle, you might pick up a kar98 and use that instead (no points for guessing the era).



For ME, I'd say that would have been a much better solution than carrying around all these weapons and ammo types and whatnot. If I only find standard ammo for a long run, then I have to use standard ammo, even if I prefer incendiary, high-explosive or something else. Love the situation, simply put.

[Terror_K]

Orkboy wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

It's hardly any different than managing thermal clips then, is it?

Totally different.

You can go through the game and never use mods

Try doing that with thermal clips.

Mods would be a convenience not a necessity.

Which means it isn't as crucial and can be ignored then, which means micromanaging and needing mods is purely a choice rather than something forced on you. That said, if the mods were good enough, one would be a fool not to use them.

[Tasker]

Terror_K wrote...

Orkboy wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

It's hardly any different than managing thermal clips then, is it?

Totally different.

You can go through the game and never use mods

Try doing that with thermal clips.

Mods would be a convenience not a necessity.

Which means it isn't as crucial and can be ignored then, which means micromanaging and needing mods is purely a choice rather than something forced on you. That said, if the mods were good enough, one would be a fool not to use them.

But then as with all good RPGs, that choice would be yours to make. 

Scrapping the inventory completely, means that the choice not to use them has already been forced upon you.

Also, that was just something I came up with as I was posting, I think it could work if it was thought about propperly.

My point though, was that if I can come up with an idea that could potentially work, then why couldn't Bioware?

Modifié par Orkboy, 14 mars 2010 - 10:28 .

[Terror_K]

Orkboy wrote...

But then as with all good RPGs, that choice would be yours to make.  

Scrapping the inventory completely, means that the choice not to use them has already been forced upon you.

Also, that was just something I came up with as I was posting, I think it could work if it was thought about propperly.

My point though, was that if I can come up with an idea that could potentially work, then why couldn't Bioware?

Agreed.

[FlyingWalrus]

Orkboy, that solution for mods is terrible. Let me reason why:



1. There is no renewable source of enemies. If your weapon mods were to replace researched upgrades, we would be wholly dependent on consumables in order to do any relevant amount of damage. If by chance we have already eradicated all enemies on our itinerary, and our last Scram Rail disintegrates before it's time to face the big bad, are we crap out of luck or what? Maybe you could manufacture more, what with the incredible amount of useless resources there are out there. I'm looking at you, 200,000 platinum.



But yeah. They might have best left the debriefings after mission completions as e-mails rather than a victory screen with what became a somewhat annoying jingle.



I don't think ME2 was anywhere near a "****** poor" sequel to ME1. Nearly everything was improved, but with those changes came a new stall of complaints. It can't be helped. What makes a game sequel good? Is it the story? Because ME2 is certainly not lacking there. Is it the gameplay? The overhauls were solely to improve gameplay!



I think the weapons are fine as they are. Keep them few, keep them relevant. What ought to be expanded on instead is armor customization options. BioWare took a great leap forward in allowing you to choose the components and looks of your armor rather than having to choose whole suits. It's not hard at all to recreate the look of the Colossus, among other options. That said, it makes little sense for your allies not to have combat hardsuits of their own. This was a major fumble, even if I do like seeing the firelight play off of Miranda's impossibly tight and curvaceous bottom.



Basically, what is lacking is presentation.

[Jebel Krong]

This thread is a great example of why BW shouldn't listen too hard to the "fans" because, really, there is no consensus of opinion.

[Jebel Krong]

scyphozoa wrote...

I love the new shooter mechanics and IMO the story was never compromised. I really enjoyed the story of ME2. The "RPG-elements" that were removed definitely leave a void, something to be desired in ME2. I would love to see squadmembers have 1 full armor set, akin to Shep's N7 armor. Armor pieces that Shep buys should be compatible with squadmate armor. I would also like color customization for squadmate armor, also like Shep's N7. Basically reproduce the N7 armor mechanic for every squadmember with their own armor style.

Personally, I love the new weapon upgrading mechanic and finding upgrades in missions, I don't think the weapon system needs to be changed much at all. The armor definitely leaves more to be desired.

case in point: how on earth could the heat-sink fiasco be less of an issue than the armour system? seriously?! weapon upgrading is fine, though under-explained and developed, perhaps, but the ammo system is terrible, and hobbles certain classes.

everyone complained that party members had default armours in certain cut-scenes in me1/on the ship. this was changed to 2 unique sets for #2, which were consistent throughout the game, in all scenes. one of the reasons it's either/or is that memory requirements to load all the customisations in scenes is too high for everyone except shepard. also, how is it realistic for shepard to decide what armour squaddies wear? people have to be aware of technical limitations in what they are asking, as well as believability. i know it's an rpg, but you don't have to be able to micromanage everything in the universe as a result...

[MacGruber1986]

Jebel Krong wrote...

This thread is a great example of why BW shouldn't listen too hard to the "fans" because, really, there is no consensus of opinion.

Yeah that...at the end of the day, there's never going to be a ME 3 that makes everyone happy. They should focus on making the best game they can, and not worry about trying to please everyone because that's a fool's venture. From that presentation, it seems as if they're taking some criticisms of a vocal group of fans from here and using that as a basis of development. Should they take those opinions into account? Absolutely. Should they reinvent the wheel just because some people didn't like a particular aspect? Absolutely not. I have faith in Bioware that they'll do what's best to make ME 3 the amazing finale that a terrific trilogy like this deserves, I just hope they don't let one group of fans influence them, for one way or the other.

(For the record, I'm not opposed to an inventory at all, but I will cry sad tears if I have to spend large chunks of game time converting the five Banshee VIII assualt rifles into omni-gel, or should I equip Kaidan with one of those, etc etc...)

[FlyingWalrus]

The classes that would most be "hobbled" by the heat sink system would probably be Inflitrators and Vanguards.

And to be frank, I didn't find myself "hobbled" often.

I don't think it's too much to, as their frickin' commander, demand that my squad come to battle in full, Shepard-approved battle gear. As for feasibility, that's not my judgment to make. I highly doubt that the limitations are technology so much as time and money to develop such things. Angst.

[Jebel Krong]

blackrhubarb 2.0 wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...

This thread is a great example of why BW shouldn't listen too hard to the "fans" because, really, there is no consensus of opinion.

Try to look at it another way. Instead of choosing or rejecting a feature, give us a choice. Much of the 'improvements' done to ME2 boil down to a diminished, or outright lack of, choice. If some fans don't want to use them, they aren't missing out.

The ini modding already done to the PC version of ME2 shows what's possible with the game as it is now. All the console players need is a menu for options.

as i've tried to point out already, it's not just about choice - it's about believability as well as technical reasons too. how tedious would micromanaging 9/10 squaddies, or however many end up being in #3? how realistic is it to be "dressing" your squad-mates anyway? as for weapons and variety, how much of me1 was the "illusion" of choice, really? all the armour-types were basically the same, with slightly different stats. all the weapons were, too. only some of the mods had any pratical effect at all. at least with me2, the upgrades were all handled consistently and had an appreciable effect (negated somewhat by enemy auto-levelling), even if weapon variety was disappointing.

[Grizzly46]

blackrhubarb 2.0 wrote...

Jebel Krong wrote...


as i've tried to point out already, it's not just about choice - it's about believability as well as technical reasons too. how tedious would micromanaging 9/10 squaddies, or however many end up being in #3? how realistic is it to be "dressing" your squad-mates anyway? as for weapons and variety, how much of me1 was the "illusion" of choice, really? all the armour-types were basically the same, with slightly different stats. all the weapons were, too. only some of the mods had any pratical effect at all. at least with me2, the upgrades were all handled consistently and had an appreciable effect (negated somewhat by enemy auto-levelling), even if weapon variety was disappointing.

I agree. If you think it's tedious, I would support an option to ignore it.  I don't think it would be as tedious as scanning for resources, something I'm forced to do.

As for realism, I don't see any realism in being in outer space in a catsuit and oxygen mask.

Ouch, don't drag that can of worms in here! One thing is basically about game mechanics (ie, code), and the other is about a very prominent lack of 3D models. Shepard doesn't eat or go to the bathroom either, but that doesn't mean those things don't happen, just as being in space only dressed in a tight latex suit won't happen either. The difference is just that one fault is invisible, the other is.

[Dethateer]

Orkboy wrote...

Terror_K wrote...

It's hardly any different than managing thermal clips then, is it?

Totally different.

You can go through the game and never use mods

Try doing that with thermal clips.

Mods would be a convenience not a necessity.

Oy! Dem Adept 'umiez say owwerwize!

[Jebel Krong]

blackrhubarb 2.0 wrote...

You brought the realism worms, not me. As for invisible faults, that is your perspective. I think the game is worse off for what it lacks, whereas you don't.

It's been said many times before, allowing more options for those that want them doesn't hinder those that don't.

it does when those resources could be better used to create an even better game for everyone.

[Fraevar]

Well I'm happy that Christina admits in her presentation that they need richer RPG systems for ME3. The shooting was great in ME2, the problem was it ended up basically being the one gameplay type in the entire game. BioWare polished a bit too hard, in my opinion and it ended up hollowing out some core tenants of the first game. There's a reason I avoid games like Gears of War. Granted, BioWare's writing and universe are leaps ahead of Epic's, but still - it is frustrating to see features of a game I didn't really like shoehorned into a franchise I thought was about something else entirely.

That being said, BioWare's shooting felt more smooth and much less frustrating that Gears of War's.

Modifié par Delerius_Jedi, 14 mars 2010 - 12:32 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

Grizzly46 wrote...

Very interesting to see the thinking behind ME2 - very informative. I honestly find ME2 a vastly better game than ME1 (which is by no means bad), but in their eagerness to polish the game, they polished a little too much, like pulling down non-combat areas in size so much it became ridiculous. I think that ME2, as good as it is when it comes to Bioware's real strength, the story telling part or narrative, it didn't quite reach the gold medal place - the relationships were still shallow, there are factual errors in the real science fields, there are plotholes and so on. Still, it is encouraging to see they listened to people for the sequel to ME1, and hopefully they will keep doing that for the next installment. Listening in might be one of the most important parts of any good game developer's agenda.

Your reply comes very close to what I think about the subject. Thanks for that.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Meistr_Chef wrote...

I have trouble reconciling the importance of inventory in an RPG. It's always been there, but I have always doubted its importance when trying to make a hybrid game with a stronger story and pace focus. The inventory feeds a certain gamer's need for loot, is basically what I can come up with. Borderlands is the most recent game to make this abundantly clear; that some gamers just want to collect loot.

Yes it's addictive but does from a big picture standpoint, how much does an inventory make you feel like you're inhabiting a role in the game, in a meaningful way? Does an item define you as a person? Given a finite time and human resource to produce a game, do you spend your resources crafting more unique levels, or do you create an inventory and lessen the impact but including more cut and paste areas to masquerade as "exploration"? I believe there is more interaction between the inventory and game development compromises than some would like to admit.

Inventory and loot in ME1 were problematic because there was way too much loot. It was also nearly impossible to find or buy stuff you really wanted like high-end omnitools or bioamps. Let's highlight a slide from the presentation which addresses the inventory.

From one of Christina Norman's slides...

Better invemtory
- Equip your whole squad easily
- Less "junk"
- Great GUI
- Upgradeable weapons

For the armor the "Equip your whole squad easily" goal has been reduced to having two sets of clothes for squad mates. In practice it means that squad mates don't have any armor at all, nor can you customize it. On another slide there is this Albert Einstein quote: "Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler." Suffice to say that I think she failed there terribly in this context. When applied to weapons it fails too, because accessing weapons is more complex than ever before. Because you cannot access an inventory directly you need to go back to the Normandy to change weapons required for the mission. But BioWare also saw that problem so they scattered devices all around the galaxy that are able to magically access the Normandy's armory. You can find these on every planet, base and ship, from an heretic's ship to a Collector base. Still, that doesn't have the same advantage as a simple inventory which you can access anytime and nor does it make sense from a story point of view.

If less "junk" is a problem then you simply have to create less junk. Removing an inventory is certainly a way to solve the problem, but it also prevents you from having convenient access to weapons and armor.

The "great GUI" made me giggle. What were they thinking. There is no great GUI in ME2 which allow me to figure out what weapons or armor are better. Nor is is there a great GUI which allows me to access my property conveniently. All the interfaces have been stripped of any stats that could help in this regard. The "great" GUI is only accessible if you go to the Normandy and access the devices in the armory (or the other magic devices scattered throughout the galaxy) and your cabin.

The most complex way to upgrade your weapons is the new system to replace the simple concept of "loot and inventory". Here is how it works now: You'll find a research plan of a device. In my example a gun. You go to the Normandy and scan for resources using an incredible dumb mini-"game". You walk to the lab to access the manufacturing thingy. You select the research plans. You walk to the armory to equip or unequip the gun for the various team members. That sounds a lot more complicated then adding stuff your inventory and equip it whenever you need it. 

When I told Atbert about this, he shook his head and said "Simplicity is not that relative"

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 14 mars 2010 - 12:58 .

[Tasker]

FlyingWalrus wrote...

Orkboy, that solution for mods is terrible. Let me reason why:

1. There is no renewable source of enemies. If your weapon mods were to replace researched upgrades, we would be wholly dependent on consumables in order to do any relevant amount of damage. If by chance we have already eradicated all enemies on our itinerary, and our last Scram Rail disintegrates before it's time to face the big bad, are we crap out of luck or what? Maybe you could manufacture more, what with the incredible amount of useless resources there are out there. I'm looking at you, 200,000 platinum.

It's true that there are finite enemies, but the same can be said of DA:O and that manages to incorporate consumables just fine.

As i've already stated, I came up with that idea on the spur of the moment, yes it would need to be thought out properly, but it wouldn't be as limiting as you make out.

In ME1 people moaned that they could aquire money really easily, and yes you could that's true, but If they had consumable mods that you could both find and buy from shops, then it allows you to spend that money and also gets rid of the need to medi-gel absolutely everything.

If you choose to use them or not, at least you have that choice.

Also, how is running out of mods at the end boss any different than running out of thermal clips?

ME1 needed a money sink, consumables are a money sink, in ME2 they introduced consumables in the form of fuel and probes, but then removed the econemy so that the money to buy them was limited. Combine the fuel/probes with mod consumables and I reckon the ME1 econemy/looting/inventory system would be fine. 

But again, my main point of my suggesting that idea was that Bioware could have very easily come up with a better system than just "Lests scrap it altogether.

FlyingWalrus wrote...

But yeah. They might have best left the debriefings after mission completions as e-mails rather than a victory screen with what became a somewhat annoying jingle.

It's especially annoying after you've completed the main plot and have decided to carry on playing.

At the end of my playthrough both myself and Miranda told TIM to go scrw himself, so why the hell would I still be geting reports off of him any way?

Same with the DLC as well now that I think about it, I told him to sod off and he still sends me armour and stuff?

FlyingWalrus wrote...

I don't think ME2 was anywhere near a "****** poor" sequel to ME1. Nearly everything was improved, but with those changes came a new stall of complaints. It can't be helped. What makes a game sequel good? Is it the story? Because ME2 is certainly not lacking there. Is it the gameplay? The overhauls were solely to improve gameplay!

Everything was improved?

How can everything be improved when they removed most of what made ME1 unique to other shooters?
 
And what was left?

- Resource gathering was turned into a boring planet scanning grindfest.

- Transitions were turned into immersion breaking insta-teleporting with monotonous loading screens.

- You can pretty much guarantee leveling up after every mission now and it's too easy to end up with points left over.

- Having a single button for sprint/cover and vault over cover only works in getting you killed.

- Can only crouch when in cover.

- Armour now only seems to be there to look good. We may as well all go around in underwear.

- The HUD looks amaturish and is far too confusing if you just glance at it.

- The map system is now pointless, oh an arrow points in the direction I need to go. Yeah that's very usefull when there's only one direction I can go in anyway?

- The mission structure is very episodic and disjointed, with no sense of cohesion.

- Team mate banter is non existant.

- Tech powers, Biotics and ammo all share the same cooldown, they're different types of abilities, why would they share cooldown?

- Signposted firefights... Oh look, a room full of crates, I wonder what's going to happen here then?

- Team mates skill sets are now too generic and no longer serve any purpose. It now doesn't matter who you have on your team as they are all pretty much te same. ( Except for the final mission )

And there are others and some of them are really niggles, but i'll take it that you get my gist by now.

FlyingWalrus wrote...

I think the weapons are fine as they are. Keep them few, keep them relevant. What ought to be expanded on instead is armor customization options. BioWare took a great leap forward in allowing you to choose the components and looks of your armor rather than having to choose whole suits. It's not hard at all to recreate the look of the Colossus, among other options. That said, it makes little sense for your allies not to have combat hardsuits of their own. This was a major fumble, even if I do like seeing the firelight play off of Miranda's impossibly tight and curvaceous bottom.

Personally I think there could do with being be a couple more of each type of weapon and they would benefit from stats telling you what their abilities are.

Armour on the other hand, other than the N7 armour customisation the armour system is stupid.  Armour serves no purpose anymore.  Oh look I get an extra 5% to my sprinting speed.  What, it's supposed to be armour not sneaker shoes.