BioWare: Mass Effect 3 Combat Perfected

[The Imp]

Yeah, not exactly looking forward to it.

In ME2, you were just as accurate and your guns were just as strong at the end as they were at the beginning. You did not get more accurate, your guns didn't get stronger, they stayed the same from beginning to end. There was no sense of progression, no sense of getting stronger. Yeah you got a couple of new guns/powers to play around with, but they didn't really change up combat. Like, at all. You still stayed behind cover and shot dudes who poked their heads out(or casted your powers, depending on your class). The only two classes that were fun to play were Vanguard(who can charge everywhere) and the Infiltrator class(can turn invisible). And even then it was still pretty "meh".

In Mass Effect 1, you start out with ass guns, ass stats, ass armor, and pretty much just ass everything. But as you progress, you get better. Your weapons get better. Your skills get better. Your team gets better. You have an actual sense of progression. At the start I had to fire in bursts and couldn't cast much powers. By the end I could fire for 2 minutes without the gun overheating(not counting the "overload" power, which boosts accuracy/lowers heating up even more), my guns were super-accurate, I had such beefy armor I was like a tank. I went from "standard soldier" to "uber-badass". And it was great.

You also learn how the combat works. At the start you'll fumble around, but then you'll learn it. Learn when to use your powers, when take your shots, everything. You get better, Shepard gets better, you both get better at the same time and it just gives a sense of immersion that no other game has ever given me. Most people try to play Mass Effect 1 as a straight up shooter. Casting powers all at once, running in, ect. and I think thats why there was so much hate for it.

Mass Effect 1 is not a shooter. It is an RPG(although that in itself is debatable) with shooter elements. If you play it as a tactical RPG, pausing while playing, issuing orders, managing powers, ect. the game's combat gets great, fun, and interesting.

In ME2 you start out as "so-so badass" and just stay that way through the whole game. You don't get better, don't get more accurate, don't improve your guns(all the guns are basically side-grades instead of upgrades). There just isn't any sense of progression. Yeah you level up and get a bit more powers, but they all have the same cooldown for some stupid reason, so you'll cast one, then wait for everything to recharge, and then do it again. Its boring.

Again, ME1 is not a shooter. If you don't like that, then guess what? The game is not for you. This is not a bad thing, it just means this game is not for you.

ME2 is a shooter. I guess it would be an action adventure, since it has essentially no role-playing. Same with Mass Effect 1, only ME1 is just adventure with shooter elements. Again, ME2 being more shooter-like isn't bad per-say, its just boring as hell to me.

Also ME1 had infinite ammo. And no matter how you say it, I don't see how going from unlimited ammo to limited ammo is an upgrade. Especially if you like sniping, in which case you'll be running out of ammo very quickly and have to just go up the front lines and fight Gears of War style anyway. Or sit in an area where the ammo things constantly respawn, which completely undermines the new ammo mechanic.

And another thing, I seem to be one of the very few people who think naturally moving in/out of cover is better then pressing A to stick yourself to a wall. In ME1 if you want to take cover you go up to a wall, and Shepard automatically gets into cover. In ME2 you have to tell him to do it. I guess TIM didn't fully repair his brain if he doesn't have the sense to get into cover when getting shot.

And that is why I liked ME1's combat much more than ME2's. Hopefully ME3 brings back the sense of progression, but from what I hear I doubt it.

Like you took the words from my mouth, great read.

 

[JeanLuc761]

Kind of sad what Bioware is slowly becoming since it became part of EA, not that it wasn't to be expected but it's still depressing, from deep and involving story and characters to mindless action and cliche and shallow story and characters, from the leading RPG developer to crappy action and shooter games, did all the people that work on previous games just die ? cause after DA2 and now hearing this it seems like Bioware itself isn't far off from following them... hell even my hopes for SW TOR are slowly being killed

Well... looks like I won't be buying Mass Effect 3.
Mass Effect 2 was a broken, dumbed down piece of shit and bioware made me pay $120 for an expansion that should have been DLC.
Fuck Bioware. We knew EA would destroy them.
Anyone remember Jade Empire?
Such a good game, shame it will likely never see a sequel.
-Tabs<3-

As someone who absolutely adored KOTOR, Mass Effect 1 and 2, and Dragon Age 1 & 2, I'm honestly not seeing these supposedly major "downfalls."

I'm perfectly willing to grant that Mass Effect 2 was too heavily streamlined in the RPG aspects but that's about the only concession I'm willing to make. The third person shooting mechanics in ME1 were mediocre at best, especially when compared to the hyper-refined Gears of War.

As for Dragon Age 2, which receives an awful lot of hate...while the game certainly has quite a few faults (Kirkwall is one boring place), after playing 40 hours of it I have to call BS on anyone who says that the combat has been dumbed down. The stats are still incredibly in-depth and the cross-class-combos are brilliant.

I don't know, maybe it's because I'm not an RPG purist but I simply don't see how Bioware is being ruined, and I certainly don't blame EA for every little fault.

 

[Togs]

Instead of launching into one of my customary DA2 bashing bioware hating rants Im just gonna say "Ill believe it when I see it".

Oh and please please please dont make it suck.

 

[BoogieManFL]

Yeah, not exactly looking forward to it.

In ME2, you were just as accurate and your guns were just as strong at the end as they were at the beginning. You did not get more accurate, your guns didn't get stronger, they stayed the same from beginning to end. There was no sense of progression, no sense of getting stronger. Yeah you got a couple of new guns/powers to play around with, but they didn't really change up combat. Like, at all. You still stayed behind cover and shot dudes who poked their heads out(or casted your powers, depending on your class). The only two classes that were fun to play were Vanguard(who can charge everywhere) and the Infiltrator class(can turn invisible). And even then it was still pretty "meh".

In Mass Effect 1, you start out with ass guns, ass stats, ass armor, and pretty much just ass everything. But as you progress, you get better. Your weapons get better. Your skills get better. Your team gets better. You have an actual sense of progression. At the start I had to fire in bursts and couldn't cast much powers. By the end I could fire for 2 minutes without the gun overheating(not counting the "overload" power, which boosts accuracy/lowers heating up even more), my guns were super-accurate, I had such beefy armor I was like a tank. I went from "standard soldier" to "uber-badass". And it was great.

You also learn how the combat works. At the start you'll fumble around, but then you'll learn it. Learn when to use your powers, when take your shots, everything. You get better, Shepard gets better, you both get better at the same time and it just gives a sense of immersion that no other game has ever given me. Most people try to play Mass Effect 1 as a straight up shooter. Casting powers all at once, running in, ect. and I think thats why there was so much hate for it.

Mass Effect 1 is not a shooter. It is an RPG(although that in itself is debatable) with shooter elements. If you play it as a tactical RPG, pausing while playing, issuing orders, managing powers, ect. the game's combat gets great, fun, and interesting.

In ME2 you start out as "so-so badass" and just stay that way through the whole game. You don't get better, don't get more accurate, don't improve your guns(all the guns are basically side-grades instead of upgrades). There just isn't any sense of progression. Yeah you level up and get a bit more powers, but they all have the same cooldown for some stupid reason, so you'll cast one, then wait for everything to recharge, and then do it again. Its boring.

Again, ME1 is not a shooter. If you don't like that, then guess what? The game is not for you. This is not a bad thing, it just means this game is not for you.

ME2 is a shooter. I guess it would be an action adventure, since it has essentially no role-playing. Same with Mass Effect 1, only ME1 is just adventure with shooter elements. Again, ME2 being more shooter-like isn't bad per-say, its just boring as hell to me.

Also ME1 had infinite ammo. And no matter how you say it, I don't see how going from unlimited ammo to limited ammo is an upgrade. Especially if you like sniping, in which case you'll be running out of ammo very quickly and have to just go up the front lines and fight Gears of War style anyway. Or sit in an area where the ammo things constantly respawn, which completely undermines the new ammo mechanic.

And another thing, I seem to be one of the very few people who think naturally moving in/out of cover is better then pressing A to stick yourself to a wall. In ME1 if you want to take cover you go up to a wall, and Shepard automatically gets into cover. In ME2 you have to tell him to do it. I guess TIM didn't fully repair his brain if he doesn't have the sense to get into cover when getting shot.

And that is why I liked ME1's combat much more than ME2's. Hopefully ME3 brings back the sense of progression, but from what I hear I doubt it.

Like you took the words from my mouth, great read.

Many good points, but your ME2 armor/weapons DO improve through upgrades. Personally I prefer that to the mountain of items to sift through in ME1. I missed weapon/ammo mods a lot though.

 

[MC Sledgehammer]

+1 to what Irridium said.

Personally I'm not a big fan of the way so many publishers are working hard to make these games 'more accessible' for anyone (AKA Dumbing it down). I loved the sense of progression throughout ME1, and I was especially frustrated when I went from being able to customize my soldier's class with 10+ skill sets in ME1 to waiting to level up my 4 skills in ME2. I felt like there was more story in ME1 as well, maybe it wasn't all scripted and read to me, but it was there. This happened with Dragon Age too, in the first one you were constantly making choices and you always had at least 3-4 decisions. Dragon Age II was simplified to 3 choices at every turn: Nice, Jovial, or Douche.

Sure, I understand that making it easier for everyone gets more fans (and more $$$) involved. That's great, but don't strip away the elements of the game that attached me to it in the first place. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Since when is making things easier making them better for us? If it's impossible, sure, yes scrap it. Life is about the struggle in the first place, if we don't fight to succeed, how can anything be learned?

While I tend to argue that I play games for the story, that's not always true. The challenge is another strong attribute for a good game. Otherwise you're just following the motions, and tediously going through the game like a chore.

I'm just saying, why switch up a good thing in the middle of the series? You want a game more accessible to the pick-up and play gamers? Make a new series. The Matrix didn't become a squishy love story in the middle of the series (well, maybe a teeny bit, but regardless the rest of the elements were all still there.)

Ever since Gears and Modern Warfare it's seemed to me that a majority of the games being pumped through the system are becoming dull and saturated with simplicity. It's not true in all cases but it's become more frequent.

Just my $.02

 

[Daedalus1942]

Kind of sad what Bioware is slowly becoming since it became part of EA, not that it wasn't to be expected but it's still depressing, from deep and involving story and characters to mindless action and cliche and shallow story and characters, from the leading RPG developer to crappy action and shooter games, did all the people that work on previous games just die ? cause after DA2 and now hearing this it seems like Bioware itself isn't far off from following them... hell even my hopes for SW TOR are slowly being killed

Well... looks like I won't be buying Mass Effect 3.
Mass Effect 2 was a broken, dumbed down piece of shit and bioware made me pay $120 for an expansion that should have been DLC.
Fuck Bioware. We knew EA would destroy them.
Anyone remember Jade Empire?
Such a good game, shame it will likely never see a sequel.
-Tabs<3-

As someone who absolutely adored KOTOR, Mass Effect 1 and 2, and Dragon Age 1 & 2, I'm honestly not seeing these supposedly major "downfalls."

I'm perfectly willing to grant that Mass Effect 2 was too heavily streamlined in the RPG aspects but that's about the only concession I'm willing to make. The third person shooting mechanics in ME1 were mediocre at best, especially when compared to the hyper-refined Gears of War.

As for Dragon Age 2, which receives an awful lot of hate...while the game certainly has quite a few faults (Kirkwall is one boring place), after playing 40 hours of it I have to call BS on anyone who says that the combat has been dumbed down. The stats are still incredibly in-depth and the cross-class-combos are brilliant.

I don't know, maybe it's because I'm not an RPG purist but I simply don't see how Bioware is being ruined, and I certainly don't blame EA for every little fault.

My only complaint is with where the Mass Effect series has gone.
I think they improved on Dragon Age immensely and the combat system is practically identical, just much faster, and requires quicker thinking.
No gripe about DA2.
-Tabs<3-

 

[Irridium]

I found Mass Effect 1 tedious. If it wasn't for the story I wouldn't have completed it. Call it a sense of progression if you wish, but I dislike having to level my gun simply for me to be able to hit anything. In ME1 I spent most of my time stood behind cover, waiting for my bullets to hit their target because I wasn't levelled up enough. Fair enough if the damage rises with experience, but when I'm holding the reticule perfectly over an enemy, I don't want the superfluous roll of a dice to deem whether I hit them or not. Perhaps this makes me a blighted casual who can't appreciate the finer points of classic RPGs. Fair enough.

Add onto that the awful inventory management and the annoying Mako sections and, from a gameplay standpoint, I still hold that Mass Effect 1 wasn't all that great. It was functional, but not fun in gameplay. Maybe it was just that I chose to be a Vanguard on the first play through.

I did enjoy the levelling though, and I do think ME2 stripped the skill progression down a little too much, as well as the more linear, less open environments. That inventory system can go die in a fire though.

By the way, a role-playing game doesn't equal a game where you fuck around with an inventory screen and crunch numbers for half the play-time, it's a game where you take on and perform a role. Both games had this in spades. ME2 just trimmed the fat that got in the way of everything that was exciting about ME1. It's indeed arguable that it cut down on a little too much, but even that granted, I think ME2 is the far more enjoyable game.

Also Firewalker >>>>>>>>>> Mako

ME2 didn't "trim the fat", they burned it down to the bone. Yes the inventory was a pain, it did need improvement, but it didn't need to be completely removed. Same with all the features Bioware removed. All they had to do was not have every enemy drop lots of stuff, and to limit the upgrading/changing of weapons to the Normandy(you won't be changing armor mid-mission, thats just stupid).

As for the guns and whatnot, Mass Effect 1 is not a shooter. Its an Adventure game with light shooter/RPG elements.

And Mass Effect is not really that much of a roleplaying game(both ME1 and ME2) Anytime you tried to roleplay, you get railroaded back into being Shepard, and just Shepard.

Your right though, roleplaying does not equal dicking around with stats and levels. But its a game where you forge a role for yourself, and act it out. You can't do that in the Mass Effect games. This is not a bad thing, hell no, but it is not an RPG. And the Hammerhead is much better than the Mako.

The term "RPG" is being thrown around so damn much nobody seems to know what it means anymore. For a proper, pure RPG, I point to the Mount and Blade games.

 

[The.Bard]

I have to learn to stop coming to Bioware threads. Every time I want to partake in a conversation about how exciting ME3 is going to be, I have to shovel through so many posts ineptly describing how 2010's RPG of the Year is not, in fact, an RPG, because Role Playing Games are apparently not about delving into a role and making decisions with a fantastic story around it. They require boring minutiae and multiple inventory spreadsheets.

I'm too tired to even argue with the sentiment anymore, so maybe we can just come to some kind of truce? If you see a thread about ME3, before you click "Post" on your 'awesome' paragraph about how ME2 is not an RPG, you could consider this... everyone has heard it, and nothing you're going to say is original.

If you don't like the game, go find an RPG that you do like and heap your love upon it. Is that not a nobler cause than dogging the ME series with your factually incorrect hate? If the ME series isn't the RPG series for you, that's totally cool, but stop whining that just because you don't like it means it must not be an RPG at all. You guys are destroying the extranet for the rest of us.

And I, for one, am very excited for what will surely be a strong contender for both Game & RPG of the Year honors.

 

[RatRace123]

Better RP elements and improved combat? Bioware, you tease.
I'm eager to see the combat in action now.

I liked Mass Effect 2, though not as much as 1. Parts of 2 didn't "gel" for me, and it wasn't just a reduction of RP elements (that was part of it, but I got over it.). It felt a lot more linear to me, I can't really explain why.
I've also said it before, it lacked a proper antagonist like Saren. That's actually the biggest problem I have with it, I think.

 

[BoogieManFL]

Kind of sad what Bioware is slowly becoming since it became part of EA, not that it wasn't to be expected but it's still depressing, from deep and involving story and characters to mindless action and cliche and shallow story and characters, from the leading RPG developer to crappy action and shooter games, did all the people that work on previous games just die ? cause after DA2 and now hearing this it seems like Bioware itself isn't far off from following them... hell even my hopes for SW TOR are slowly being killed

Well... looks like I won't be buying Mass Effect 3.
Mass Effect 2 was a broken, dumbed down piece of shit and bioware made me pay $120 for an expansion that should have been DLC.
Fuck Bioware. We knew EA would destroy them.
Anyone remember Jade Empire?
Such a good game, shame it will likely never see a sequel.
-Tabs<3-

As someone who absolutely adored KOTOR, Mass Effect 1 and 2, and Dragon Age 1 & 2, I'm honestly not seeing these supposedly major "downfalls."

I'm perfectly willing to grant that Mass Effect 2 was too heavily streamlined in the RPG aspects but that's about the only concession I'm willing to make. The third person shooting mechanics in ME1 were mediocre at best, especially when compared to the hyper-refined Gears of War.

As for Dragon Age 2, which receives an awful lot of hate...while the game certainly has quite a few faults (Kirkwall is one boring place), after playing 40 hours of it I have to call BS on anyone who says that the combat has been dumbed down. The stats are still incredibly in-depth and the cross-class-combos are brilliant.

I don't know, maybe it's because I'm not an RPG purist but I simply don't see how Bioware is being ruined, and I certainly don't blame EA for every little fault.

I loved Dragon Age. And after I bought it I played it every day until I completed it. And went through again.. I have to tell myself I wasted $60 on DA2 and need to get my money's worth in order to play it. That's wrong.

Dragon Age 2 was a rush job. While some of the combat/gameplay adjustments are clearly improvements the ludicrous amount of recycled content and the FREAKING DUMBASS teleporting waves of badguys alone are enough to make me disappointed with Bioware and it makes me angry that the game costs 60 bucks. It's clearly not worth it, and they know it. It's only got what is has because it rode on DA:O's coat tails. If it was Dragon Age 1, and DA:O never existed we probably would not have seen a DA2.

 

[Irridium]

I agree with you on most of this shit, but to say ME2 had no RPG elements means you're forgetting what an RPG is: role-playing. Your choices and dialogue actually affect who lives, who dies, and what happens in the story. It has those parts of an RPG (that JRPGs don't), but it doesn't have the customization that people associate with an RPG.

Yes, your choices and dialog do have an affect. But its not much of one. For the most part, they affected how many emails you got. There were some moments that were different based on your choices(and one that was bugged. Conrad always says you shot him, even when you didn't).

Unless ME3 goes all out with consequences based on your choices, I don't think it'll be that big. Hopefully they will be, and it seems thats what Bioware's going for, but I won't hold my breath.

And an RPG is about forging your own character, and roleplaying him/her. Anytime you try to roleplay in Mass Effect you get railroaded back into being Shepard and have to choose what he would choose, not what you would choose. Mass Effect is more of an adventure game with action elements(ME2 is straight up action/adventure). But its not much of a roleplaying game.

As I said, for a proper, pure roleplaying game, look at the Mount and Blade games.

 

[Quellist]

Well wonderful, Bioware gives another two-fingered salute to the RPG fans that made it big by catering first to FPS players. Wonder what there is going to be in ME3 for someone who loved Baldurs gate 1+2, Planescape Torment and the two Kotor games? not a lot i should imagine...

 

[JeanLuc761]

I agree with you on most of this shit, but to say ME2 had no RPG elements means you're forgetting what an RPG is: role-playing. Your choices and dialogue actually affect who lives, who dies, and what happens in the story. It has those parts of an RPG (that JRPGs don't), but it doesn't have the customization that people associate with an RPG.

Yes, your choices and dialog do have an affect. But its not much of one. For the most part, they affected how many emails you got. There were some moments that were different based on your choices(and one that was bugged. Conrad always says you shot him, even when you didn't).

Unless ME3 goes all out with consequences based on your choices, I don't think it'll be that big. Hopefully they will be, and it seems thats what Bioware's going for, but I won't hold my breath.

And an RPG is about forging your own character, and roleplaying him/her. Anytime you try to roleplay in Mass Effect you get railroaded back into being Shepard and have to choose what he would choose, not what you would choose. Mass Effect is more of an adventure game with action elements(ME2 is straight up action/adventure). But its not much of a roleplaying game.

As I said, for a proper, pure roleplaying game, look at the Mount and Blade games.

Forgive me but...what do you mean "not what you would choose?"

I've played Mass Effect 1 at least 10 times and Mass Effect 2 4 times, and I can't think of more than a handful of dialogue options where I was being railroaded into making a choice that I didn't want to make (confrontation with VS on Horizon being a notable one). I've always been able to play Shepard with the choices that I would want to make.

 

[similar.squirrel]

As long as they've perfected the biotics and tech as well, I'm happy. I never really understood why they had to emulate Gears of War in ME2. The powers are what makes combat interesting.

 

[Telekinesis]

That last paragraph makes me sad. Sounds like it's just gonna be Call of Duty in space with aliens and some skill trees. Great.

 

[RanD00M]

Okay, that's all fine and good even though I enjoyed the combat in ME1. My main question is if it will be as shallow in the RPG elements/dialog/moral ambiguity as ME 2 was.

 

[AMX58]

Lets get it I cant wait to play it.

played both ways good an evil do not know which I liked more. I'm also on my third playthrough

 

[Zhukov]

The RPG-crowd are gonna hate it though. "It's justed a dumbed down shooter now! Ruined forever! Waaah!

Heh.

... and we will be right. The series is supposed to be an RPG series, not an action game series.

Supposed to be, huh?

How exactly did you arrive at that conclusion? How do you decide what a particular release is "supposed" to be? How is that your decision to make? I suspect what you meant to say was, "It was supposed to be tailored to my tastes."

Oh hey, I hereby declare that Bulletstorm was supposed to be a platformer.

(snipped for space)

With "Mass Effect 2" they sold so many copies because of the success of the first game, it was largely due to pre-orders and first day sales like most games. The negative backlash was mostly from people who already had paid for the game. Saying that they were such a tiny minority "because of the sales" misses the entire way the industry and it's business model works.

Uh huh.

- High sales. Higher than ME1.
- Excellent reviews. 96 on metacritic. Equal to Half Life 2 and Bioshock. I'd call that a good critical reception. Among the best in fact.
- Oh yeah, and I can't help but notice that it's pretty well regarded [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.273160-Poll-Did-you-like-Mass-Effect-2?page=1] around here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.252621-Poll-Poll-Mass-Effect-1-or-2-Which-do-you-like-better] too.

You can keep telling yourself that Bioware are in for a nasty shock because they changed how they do things. But you'll only be fooling yourself.

 

[Ian Caronia]

Oh GOOOOOOOOD~ So does that mean we can finally make people both involved with and giving awards to this game shut the hell up about ME being remotely like an RPG? Since, you know, apparently Bioware wants it to be a 3rd person Call of Duty?
_Tell me, where in all the criticism about ME2's shitty FPS-rip off style gameplay (which, to be fair, is the style of gunplay with most shooters nowadays V_V)was it said that the shift was a success? Who said having the screen go red and get covered in bloody seaweed so you can't see a thing when you're about to die was a good thing? Who said the shooting-gallery type layouts of the levels was a good thing? Who said the turn to common clip-ammo type was-?

I want to hear nothing involving RPGs or JRPGs from Bioware or it's fanbase. Nothing. Here it is, folks! Here's what your RPG OF THE YEAR is! A fucking shooter! Of course shooters aren't bad, but the company was making an RPG wasn't it? ME was classified as an RPG and it's fans bitched and moaned about how it was meant to be an RPG. Bioware badmouthed JRPGs about how less-RPG like those RPGs are in comparison to their OH you get the point.

1. Bioware has officially stated their game is a shooter.
2. Bioware supposedly brags about how it's devs added ladders to levels

Ladders. By crap, that's some forward thinking. Couldn't get old at all, all that ladder climbing. Fuck crouching or jumping. LADDERS, mate.
Well, I'll be looking forward to Call of Effect 3: Modern Gunplay Letdown for the 360 and PS3 later this year. I'm already getting all hot and bothers over the prospect of more screen obscuring cover-based "shoot till the clip's empty" combat.
I can only hope they aren't going to ruin the story and characters with gigantic tit-pandering and generic, crappy dialogue.