314 réponses à ce sujet

[Lycidas]

sinosleep wrote...

Shepard is a soldier. When I was in the military a very common phrase was "soldier first". Whether you were infantry, support, or somewhere in between, you were a soldier, or better yet a RIFLEMAN first. I don't see why any class should result in a guns free playthrough when clearly Shepard is a SOLDIER of note. Regardless of what you choose for an origin story Shepard is a person who was part of an elite special forces division of the military and was being considered for the spectres before you do anything. ANYONE in that position would have had to be quite proficient with weaponry, regardless of specialization.

Last time I checked none of todays armies have biotics or tech experts the way we have them in the game. So what is the point in even compairing this?

[Ginnerben]

Dannok1234 wrote...

I'm starting to wonder if this idea about pure power based class or "caster" as some call it, has something to do with Dragon Age being released not too long ago. So people are more used to playing a pure mage etc from a fantasy setting, rather then how things work in the ME universe.

Edit: Bit unrelated but.. Engineer has to be one of the easiest classes to play, to me it seems to require less effort then even a soldier on insanity.

I think it has more to do with Mass Effect 1, where playing as an Adept is pretty much a pure caster.  

[_Dannok1234]

@Lycidas

If you read the books or go by both games you will notice that it is spot on about how biotics etc function in the ME universe. They use biotics and guns, not one or the other, anything else just would not make any sense.

[Lycidas]

Dannok1234 wrote...

I'm starting to wonder if this idea about pure power based class or "caster" as some call it, has something to do with Dragon Age being released not too long ago. So people are more used to playing a pure mage etc from a fantasy setting, rather then how things work in the ME universe.

Edit: Bit unrelated but.. Engineer has to be one of the easiest classes to play, to me it seems to require less effort then even a soldier on insanity.

Please watch the Adept class video and listen to what is said and you might understand why people think of the class as a caster class.
The Adept was promoted that way not as a Soldier that uses his powers to supplement his guns.

[sinosleep]

Lycidas wrote...
Last time I checked none of todays armies have biotics or tech experts the way we have them in the game. So what is the point in even compairing this?

Because it's an easy way of rationalizing the fact that ME 2 is a game meant to be played using guns to your advantage regardless of class? Bioware clearly went out of their way to incorporate guns more evenly across the classes. I'm sure the fact that Shepard is a supposed to be an elite soldier regardless of class help play into that.

p.s. The modern military does have medics and support personnel, people whose primary job ISN'T shooting. People who in fact have a pretty low likelyhood of ever firing their weapons. They are still expected to be able to pick up an M16 and hit a target from 300 meters on any given day because they are soldiers first. All I was doing was applying that to the game. I have no issue whatsoever with ME not having a pure caster class. Every game on the planet that features classes doesn't have to follow the same fighter, rogue, mage template from D&D. 

Modifié par sinosleep, 14 mars 2010 - 07:52 .

[Kronner]

Lycidas wrote...

Please watch the Adept class video and listen to what is said and you might understand why people think of the class as a caster class.
The Adept was promoted that way not as a Soldier that uses his powers to supplement his guns.

How many times it was said that the game is designed around Normal difficulty? On Insanity I guess it is logical that using weapons is a must to be effective. It is the hardest difficulty setting in the game. If you expect to go through the game without firing a shot on Insanity, what do you think happens on Normal?
Honestly, wtf do you expect, just using Singularity+Warp and killing everyone on Insanity in matter of seconds like in ME1?

Modifié par Kronner, 14 mars 2010 - 07:50 .

[_Dannok1234]

Ginnerben wrote...

I think it has more to do with Mass Effect 1, where playing as an Adept is pretty much a pure caster.  

Guess I had a very different experience playing an Adept in ME1, it would take forever to kill everything with Biotics alone, at least above normal. Just look at what was considered the optimum Adept build back in the day. Bonus skill Assault Rifle. Usually in order to save you from wasting points into armor in order to get pistol. 

Edit :
@Lycidas
True, but adepts are the best at killing people without using their guns. That doesn't have to mean it is/has to be the most effective way to play an adept. Again it would not make sense in terms of the game world to simply ignore weapons.

Modifié par Dannok1234, 14 mars 2010 - 07:52 .

[Lycidas]

Dannok1234 wrote...

@Lycidas
If you read the books or go by both games you will notice that it is spot on about how biotics etc function in the ME universe. They use biotics and guns, not one or the other, anything else just would not make any sense.

I read the books. But between the books and the game we have gone from L3 biotics to L5x for the adept. So there is lots of room in the lore to make the Adept pretty much a power only class IMHO. It is even there in the game you can play the Adept using only the biotics it is just less fun because of cooldown issues.
Btw. bringing up the books is actually pretty useless because nowhere in the lore has a armor or kinetic barrier ever stopped a biotic power;). So just don't let us go there.

Modifié par Lycidas, 14 mars 2010 - 08:09 .

[akintu]

I've thought alot about the idea of a dual cooldown for the caster classes. They could use one ability, and immediately use another ability. But they are then locked out of using any other ability until the first cooldown is up. I dunno. I read in this thread the idea of individual cooldowns with a very short global cooldown, which would be pretty great too, in my opinion.

[Lycidas]

Kronner wrote...

Lycidas wrote...

Please watch the Adept class video and listen to what is said and you might understand why people think of the class as a caster class.
The Adept was promoted that way not as a Soldier that uses his powers to supplement his guns.

How many times it was said that the game is designed around Normal difficulty? On Insanity I guess it is logical that using weapons is a must to be effective.

Sorry but I don't see the logic there. How does shifting the focus of a power heavy class to a weapon centered class on higher difficulties make sence? All it says basically is weapons > powers.

Kronner wrote...
It is the hardest difficulty setting in the game. If you expect to go through the game without firing a shot on Insanity, what do you think happens on Normal?
Honestly, wtf do you expect, just using Singularity+Warp and killing everyone on Insanity in matter of seconds like in ME1?

Honest how can you even ask this if you read what has been said before. Nobody wants that...

[Datacakes]

Average Gatsby wrote...

Datacakes wrote...

In short, I think changing the game play mechanics to be more shooter like for all classes would detract from the expansiveness that this game has got going for it.    Why not take a simpler route and make shooting guns less powerful.  Slap a slider on it and set it too normal and if the kiddies think it's too hard they can slide the slider to easy and then get more bang out of their shots.  Or for the manly men if they feel it's too easy they can adjust  so that they - ahem - they have to use their squadmates and the tactics of the far better classes: engineer, sentinel, adept.  After all thats where the real game is, tactics & strategy > skill, always.

First. I do want a danger room. With Giant purple robots.

Second, gameplay is secondary in my mind to the total experience as well to me and to pretty much everyone else. The biggest evidence of that is that one version of tali's fan thread has more posts than this entire section of the forum.

Making guns weaker is definitely an option, but it seemed like from the presentation, that is the furthest thing from BioWare's mind as far as changes for the next game. They want to keep it a shooter and they don't want to necessarily detract from that experience in any way. I was trying to think of a way to give adepts/engineers a boost without having to make it seem like shooting is weaker. There's got to be a way to make the game a better experience for the adept/engineer but still keep the game a great shooter.

Or perhaps you suggestion might work as an entirely new class mechanic.  I like the tag and delivery concept.  Tag the baddie and pop him with a power.  It adds a new tactical aspect to power based classes that requires the skill of tagging.   But I'm not sure how I would feel if it was applied to all the power based classes.  I like the Adept and Engineer and Sentinel for not being entirely gun based point and shoot.

[Lycidas]

Dannok1234 wrote...

Edit :
@Lycidas
True, but adepts are the best at killing people without using their guns. That doesn't have to mean it is/has to be the most effective way to play an adept. Again it would not make sense in terms of the game world to simply ignore weapons.

Like I said it is there, we have it in the game. The Adept can be played that way. Why not improve it to make it a bit more fun? You say it is not supported by the lore, I say so is the defence system. Lore changes to fit the game. How would it hurt to improve what the class already has?

[archurban]

extending more shooting situation maybe get me more interesting, have fun more. but it doesn't mean that they will get lower quality of RPG part. it's a part of reinforcement. I think that it's only for mass effect. as matter of fact, mass effect 3 will be easily made because of very last series that we can expect. so there will be no more mass effect. so the whole story will come to end. that's why it will be easy made. I wish that mass effect 3 will be more shooting game like other military game. actually, there are too many conversations in mass effect 2. I am kind of bored. they can possibly make more shooting scenes in order to cover conversation stuff. I believe they can do that.

[FoFoZem]

I think the game is fine as far as combat goes. If they eliminate dialog their hardcore fan base will implode

[Average Gatsby]

Here is the issue with the class gameplay video; Its not that about a can or can't situation.

Engineers and adepts aren't broken or impossible or anything like that. They are just less effective than the other classes because the nature of the games design doesn't well suit there strength. I would like, for Mass Effect 3, to have it be more even but not overpowered.

The class gameplay video shows the adept owning everyone without shooting. What the video doesn't show, however, is that if the adept had a heavy pistol out, they could get through that same section even faster.

Which makes sense because its harder to aim and shoot than it is to just target an enemy with a curvable missile. But it means that abilities simply are always going to play second fiddle to guns, and classes that use guns more, or have ways of using guns more, are going to be stronger.

I'm not saying abilities are bad, guns are good, I'm saying its not even, and it seems like for mass effect 3, they are going to attempt to make it more even, and I don't see how they can do that without changing how powers work.

I think the military analogy is a good one. I wish I could actually play as a medic. I think it would be really cool to have a class that is mostly CC and have the allies be my killing power. But that would also mean allies would have to be more powerful, which may imbalance some things for a soldier, or the CC effects have to be much stronger.

Maybe my OP doesn't word it correctly, but what I'm hoping for is a way to balance ability use with gun use for those classes that have strength in abilities instead of gun use. I'm also not necessarily expecting a mage type play with adepts/engineers, but right now, I can say that the majority of my play with engineers/adepts is gun play, with abilities coming in a more distant second. Adept is probably the closest to a 50/50 play, but engineer definitely not. I'd like to see, for ME3, a 40/60 or 30/70 guns/abilities for those to classes.

Modifié par Average Gatsby, 14 mars 2010 - 09:20 .

[Lycidas]

Average Gatsby wrote...

Which makes sense because its harder to aim and shoot than it is to just target an enemy with a curvable missile. But it means that abilities simply are always going to play second fiddle to guns, and classes that use guns more, or have ways of using guns more, are going to be stronger.

I totaly agree to the rest of your post but I'm not quite sure when it comes to aiming. What is more difficult aiming the crosshair at a target and shoot or aiming next to it to curve a power. Sure you will want to point to the head when firing your pistol but at the same time you need to be careful to not have your targeting rectangle switch to the next target while trying to curve a power the way you want it. To be honest I don't see that much of a difference there.

Edit: And Soldier, Infilitrator + Vanguard have skills that make aiming easier. I'm not saying the "caster" calsses should have something like that. I'm just saying aiming is not actually quite that difficult.

Modifié par Lycidas, 14 mars 2010 - 09:36 .

[Average Gatsby]

Let me also say that I'm talking about intension vs reality here. Its clear that 1) Shepard is a killer, meant to bear the brunt of the work as far as killing goes. The intended purpose of the Soldier, Infiltrator, and Vanguard classes were meant to be killers using guns. The intended purpose of the Sentinel seems to be the same as that as well, but in a slightly less direct way. However the engineer and adept, based on the class description and videos VS effective play in game, its unclear what their real purpose is. To perform at their best, they are gun killers, but from how they are described, they are supposed to be abilities first and guns second. Being a primary abilities user for the engineer, and then to a lesser extent adept, is definitely possible, but it isn't the most effective way to play. I my mind, if you are playing the game how it was designed, that should result in the most effective play.

One thing that is very telling, for example, is the Engineer class gameplay video. It features almost entirely Geth enemy play. The way the engineer plays on geth missions (properly spec'd) is exactly the way it first of all plays on all difficulties, and is very fun. It is also very easy. But there are only 3 plot missions with geth. The rest of the plot missions engineers are faced against enemies for which they have a far less advantageous.

Its not that they somehow can't deal with those situations, its the other classes simply have better tools all around than the adept/engineer do.

This is essentially my challenging to BioWare for ME3 gameplay, why not try to make an effort to even out class effectiveness across the board, not by making some classes weaker but by figuring out a new way to make some classes stronger and suit a different style of play. They've gotten plenty of, and will continue to get, praise from me. My channel isn't going away any time soon. But I think ME3 could be even better than ME2.

I think they are up to that challenge.

Modifié par Average Gatsby, 14 mars 2010 - 09:43 .

[sandman7431]

I think you can introduce skill elements to biotics without having to necessarily make them function like weapons.  One thing they could do, for example, is add a little bit of intuitive play to the manipulation abilities.  Basically if you look at ME1 and ME2, throw, pull, lift and every manipulation ability could be made into one power.  You could aim this power at the enemy and then have to use the controller to dictate how it manifests itself.  It would be sort of like telekenesis in that you could either push, pull, lift or slam the enemy once you used this power on them.  This would allow a feeling of weight to these moves that is so sorely lacking right now in comparison to the weapon based combat.

Likewise the engineer's hacking ability could be made into a very brief (as in 2 seconds or less) minigame that dictates whether or not the hack is successful.  Also hacking should not require you to deplete shields.

I don't think making the powers work like the weapons is the way to go.  I think they should go in the opposite direction and make them even more distinct.  They just need to flesh out the gameplay behind them a bit more instead of just making it a point and click thing.

Modifié par sandman7431, 14 mars 2010 - 09:41 .

[slyguy07]

I disagree with the aiming powers thing. They seriously need to revamp powers for ME3. Many of them are useless in biotics and tech. To do this they will need certain ones to ignore the effects of armor/barrier/shield and still work(e.g. throw knocks someone down still) or scrap the annoying armor/barrier/shield power blocking system completely. I personally think that armor is stupid in that sense as it should be a damage mitigator and not something that is a "layer" of defense.



Everything on the tech side needs an overhaul except overload. In ME1 tech powers were powerful, but not quite as much as biotics. Still they don't have the usefulness they did in ME1.



Everything is about the warp explosion or charge in ME2. They need to make all the powers useful in some way.

[Datacakes]

Average Gatsby wrote...


Maybe my OP doesn't word it correctly, but what I'm hoping for is a way to balance ability use with gun use for those classes that have strength in abilities instead of gun use. I'm also not necessarily expecting a mage type play with adepts/engineers, but right now, I can say that the majority of my play with engineers/adepts is gun play, with abilities coming in a more distant second. Adept is probably the closest to a 50/50 play, but engineer definitely not. I'd like to see, for ME3, a 40/60 or 30/70 guns/abilities for those to classes.

Ah. I see.  I thought you were wanting to completly change the mechanics for power based classes but you're just suggesting a way for them to make biotics on par with guns.  I agree with you that far too much emphasis is placed on guns.  Case in point.  On my Adept I picked up the sniper rifle and played alot with it.  I thought to myself, wtf?!, I'm supposed to be using my biotics but with that sniper rifle is was just way too easy.  I used that sniper rifle for scions and ranged baddies and used it completely for the opposite of what the Adept was supposed to do.  I used it to strip barriers/shields/armor so that I could cast my powers.  I'm laughing now cause my adept had squad warp ammo.  Yes.  You and I agree.  

I think the problem is that some powers only apply once the outer layers have been stripped and at that point you might as well use guns.   The gun based classes dont see this limitation.  All their gameplay is centered around guns.  Going up against Bloodpack?  No problem, AP or Incendieary Ammo.  Going up against Eclipse.  No problem, warp ammo.  Going up against Blue Suns or Geth.  No problem, disruptor ammo.  Cant decide which ammo to use, no problem - warp ammo.  The real problem in my opinion is that gun based classes do not need biotics, but biotics based classes need guns.  So yes, you and I agree.

[sinosleep]

@Slyguy07

While you can accidentally target someone other than your original target with powers, the fact remains that you can be obscenely lazy when it comes to tossing powers around. You can peak out of cover for a split second and hit whoever you want simply because you can place your curser a 1/4 screen away from your target and still hit them. There's no finesse to it. With a weapon, you actually have to place the curser on the target every time unless you are using a heavy weapon.

[Average Gatsby]

Here's some food for thought about the normal difficulty.

I have a video I made for myself, just to see if there was a guns/powers balance on normal. I did the exact same warlord okeer section shown in the class gameplay video, with a level 17 adept, the same level used in the video (had to save edit that one), using pulls and throws like how the video illustrates, spec'd the same as the video illustrates with heavy throw and 3 points in my passive.

Then I did the same section using just my m-3 pistol, and on the first try, it took me about 5 seconds less time. Can you imagine how quickly that section would have been done by a soldier or an infiltrator?

Now i am NOT saying that an adept with a pistol is stronger than powers. No way. Way too many variables exist to ever try to prove something like that. What I am saying is that its not like guns are somehow weaker on normal. On every difficulty, gun use trumps power use, its just a lot more obvious on higher difficulties. This makes perfect sense if the game is a shooter, which it is. What doesn't make sense is having a class designed, or stated as having been designed, to use primarily non-shooting abilities in a shooter game.

What's interesting about that section too is that the whole beginning of the mission is uniquely suited to adept strengths: Every enemy can be pull or thrown off those high points and instant killed. Yet even with that advantage, the adept doesn't have the equivalent power of a gun user.

Modifié par Average Gatsby, 14 mars 2010 - 10:48 .

[Lycidas]

sinosleep wrote...

@Slyguy07
While you can accidentally target someone other than your original target with powers, the fact remains that you can be obscenely lazy when it comes to tossing powers around. You can peak out of cover for a split second and hit whoever you want simply because you can place your curser a 1/4 screen away from your target and still hit them. There's no finesse to it. With a weapon, you actually have to place the curser on the target every time unless you are using a heavy weapon.

Just like there is no finesse in aiming with your gun when everything around you is in slow motion...
When aiming with a weapon you need to be more precise to hit with powers it is the timing that is important. I can not count the times I did the aiming right but my target ducked away a split second before the power would actually hit. So IMHO neither is really hard to do and thus there is no point in arguing about it.

[Lycidas]

Average Gatsby wrote...

Then I did the same section using just my m-3 pistol, and on the first try, it took me about 5 seconds less time. Can you imagine how quickly that section would have been done by a soldier or an infiltrator?

Actually you can see this in the class video itself. In the part where the Pull Throw combo is used most targets are so close to death due to the squads weapons by the time the Adept is using his Throw there is no more point in it (they would have died by falling damage alone).

[Average Gatsby]

Lycidas wrote...

Average Gatsby wrote...

Then I did the same section using just my m-3 pistol, and on the first try, it took me about 5 seconds less time. Can you imagine how quickly that section would have been done by a soldier or an infiltrator?

Actually you can see this in the class video itself. In the part where the Pull Throw combo is used most targets are so close to death due to the squads weapons by the time the Adept is using his Throw there is no more point in it (they would have died by falling damage alone).

Yup. I noticed that too. The player is hard pressed to even contribute to the kill before the allies with guns take em out.

So I updated the OP with some weird triangles and squares that I came up with to try to illustrate what I'm talking about with the game play differences between the first two games and why I'd like to see a change, not a return but a change, in ME3.