BioWare: Mass Effect 3 Combat Perfected

[The.Bard]

I know you meant to be snarky and probably somewhat offensive, but I'm man enough to say this made me laugh a bit. Genuinely. XD

I'm glad. I usually approach Hulk Rages w/ a sure-fire litmus test of humor: if you respond angrily, then you're probably not worth discussing anything with. If you laugh, it means you're level headed enough to talk to. 'Grats on passing! XD

Now, seriously though, I am looking forward to ME3 and so of course I'd visit threads on the game. Never said I wasn't going to buy it. Just ranted about how it clearly isn't an RPG anymore. RPG in genre, not textbook definition.

The one thing that always confuses me is why people need to categorize and break it down so finitely. I made a joke in someone else's comments about trees. Redwoods are trees. Palm trees are trees. But the two don't have a lot in common on the surface. Mass Effect is not a prototypical RPG. But I don't see why its existence as an RPG just drives some people up the wall.

Especially when you consider this is where Bioware was going from ME1. They didn't really veer sideways out of the blue for the 2nd one. They just were not very good at making shooters when the first one came out.

Read their quotes on this again and tell me they aren't telling everyone ME3 is a shooter. Flat out? No, because that's how you leave pseudo wiggle room when those who were hoping for more RPG elements start to fire back. But they certainly are not hiding it's real genre.

Again... who cares? I thought ME2 was a brilliant RPG, and until they prove me wrong, I'm going to assume that ME3 will continue to have best of breed shooter and RPG hybrid mechanics.

I will agree that Mass Effect isn't "your daddy's RPG", but the need everyone has on both sides to shove it into the correct little box is just baffling. Is it a competent game? Is it well made? These are the things I care about, not which bucket it gets dumped into.

I also get the impression he was referring to multiple paths and high/low tiers, not the actual addition of ladders. But that's me extrapolating. A dangerous past-time (I know!)

Bit much with the "dangerous past-time" there, mate. I never implied inferring about something was a bad thing.

I was quoting Disney's Beauty & the Beast... you can't call something a dangerous past-time without adding "I know!"

Anyway, your interesting idea is not the case, since the article states:
"...Ladders providing access to multi-leveled areas..."

It's funny, when I posted my last comment I thought I might not have explained myself well, and it looks like I didn't. I wasn't trying to infer that he said there wouldn't be ladders. I was trying to say that I didn't think he was mentioning ladders as the end-all be-all, but more of the idea that adding things like ladders mean terrain could play a more strategic (and hopefully more expansive) role in combat.

Mate, in the end, I want ME3. Bad. Love Tali, Garrus and Jack. But I want people to stop calling it an RPG just as bad. It's not. ME2 didn't deserve RPG of the year, and ME3 sure as hell doesn't either. Shooter of the year? HELL YES (maybe, yet to see ME3)! Put it in it's genre, especially so that others who badmouth JRPGs and RPGs don't end up looking stupid by bringing up ME in such an argument.

Who cares? As much as you say it isn't an RPG, I say it is. Does that take anything away from it? No. It just means you define an RPG differently than what Mass Effect provides. It isn't wrong, per se, but I think in general, the negative bashing that comes with ranting at it supposedly not being an RPG is tiresome at best, and petulant at worst.

Mass Effect is unlike any other game I've played. I wouldn't want it to be like a Call of Duty shooter anymore than I would want it to be like a by-the-numbers RPG like Baldur's Gate. People just need to chill and love the Mass Effect for what it is.

 

[tehroc]

Now you see, combat in a shooter can never be perfected until there is NO. GODDAMN. COVER. BASED. SHOOTING!!! (or third person view). The only non-platformer shooter I consider to have truly good combat with either (or in this case, both) of the aforementioned mechanics is Gears of War.

Mass Effect has awful, tedious and extremely easy combat (even on the hardest setting) and when it isn't ridiculously easy, its just frustrating and stupid because you can be clever about how you do it -- there are no vantage points or tactically advantageous positions -- just cover.
Popping in and out of cover. for 5-8 hours. with occasional breaks for cutscenes.
Why do game developers think it is fun? WHY?

...God, Mass Effect is overrated.

/rage

/liked
I agree Mass Effect is so overrated while being a poor Gears of War clone

 

[Awexsome]

The powers like biotics and tech skills in combat were only improved from the first to second. I actually used them in the second one because in the first they were more hassle than fun.

But I heard somewhere that they're bringing back some customization for the weapons like barrels and maybe even ammo back to an attachment. I did like ME1's version of gun customization better. If they can strike a balance between the pages of inventory of duplicate items in ME1 and the single weapon, linear upgrade 1 -> upgrade 2 for all weapons in ME2 I will be a most happy camper.

 

[Drake_Dercon]

I just hope it's actually a happy medium and not one of those "we went to the middle, and it just kind of feels like we threw a bunch of stuff together and called it a game".

 

[Yureina]

They better not skimp on the RPG elements while trying to make this into a shooter... or even I won't be able to forgive Bioware for that. >_<

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

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.

Yeah. Looks like they will just build on 2's. Playing a sniper will be frustrating once again. Seriously, one round a clip when you pick one up? Who designed that?

 

[Hairetos]

So they're most proud of the combat system of their shooter-RPG?

Well, I just lowered my expectations a couple dozen pegs. It wasn't fucking broken after ME2, so...

 

[Dusk17]

Its not like they could do any worse than the first mass effect's combat system.

 

[Ian Caronia]

Who cares? As much as you say it isn't an RPG, I say it is. Does that take anything away from it? No. It just means you define an RPG differently than what Mass Effect provides. It isn't wrong, per se, but I think in general, the negative bashing that comes with ranting at it supposedly not being an RPG is tiresome at best, and petulant at worst.

Mass Effect is unlike any other game I've played. I wouldn't want it to be like a Call of Duty shooter anymore than I would want it to be like a by-the-numbers RPG like Baldur's Gate. People just need to chill and love the Mass Effect for what it is.

Hrm... That's-!
...Hm.. Well It's just-
...
XD Okay, you got me. It's true that life is colored by perception, and that if someone enjoys something through a particular perception that doesn't hurt anybody/thing than there's no reason to try to change their POV. Just like I passed your test, you surprised me with this outlook.

You can say that all the arguments I've gone through defending P4 and Oblivion from the MEW [Mass Effect Wankers (my term for those who jerk-off on the ME box because it's their one true religion or something)] has left me with a short fuse for Bioware's public speeches on their game and how they put down other genre when their games have the same "flaws".

Anyway, I can agree and agree to disagree with you on this one, mate. I want lesser known RPGs to get their time in the light and the awards they're due, and I hate how Bioware is turning an RPG shooter into a straight up shooter with generic tired gunplay (your opinion on the ladders is promising though), but at the end of the day I guess it really doesn't matter how we define it so long as it's fun.

Glad you were as amiable as I hoped you were, mate! Hope you have fun with your ME3 RPG, because I hope I'll be having a blast with my ME3 shooter!

 

[MiracleOfSound]

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".

I agree that the sense of progression was lost man, but I gotta say I found the gradual accuracy increase in ME1 frustrating to deal with. It was like a backwards learning curve, the game got easier towards the end and I always find the first few hours of ME1 a chore due to the clunky aiming. I much preferred how it worked in ME2.

I will say though that I'd love it if they put a lot more stat focus into powers, armour and mods even gun damage stats.... just not the actual shooting accuracy cos tome that removes the element of feeling skillful for pulling off great shots.

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.

I agree with that 100%... I hated how you had to wait for powers to cool down before using another one. It over-simplified it and removed some of the tactical element.

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.

I preferred the ME2 ammo system... I dunno why, I just guess that it feels more satisfying to use your ammo in a more controlled way. In ME1 it was just 'spray into the massive aiming reticule for 5 minutes till the enemy dies' kinda deal... I preferred the more precise and controlled feel in ME2.

 

[Squeaky]

awsome dumb it down some more I thought the combat was fine in 2 it was just the leveling that was boring and seemed pointless might as well have just tore xp out didnt matter where you spent your points.

 

[Kakashi on crack]

Ahh, so we've spent all this time that we could have spent creating a great story-driven plot, for a, I don't know, game who's main focus in the past was the PLOT and STORY, to instead come up with new mechanics in combat to "be compared with the best shooters in the world."

I better hear something about the plot and how great it is soon, or I'm going to start looking at Mass Effect 3 as a "shooter where you make some choices that effect a couple things."

Not trying to be an ass here (well, actually, I am.) but I personally could care less about the combat system of the Mass Effect games if I can have my story-line. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's going to look at this and say "ahh, so Bioware is gimping out on what the game has revolved around to instead make a call of duty clone with a sci-fi setting."

 

[KorLeonis]

Soooo, they took a good game in ME1, broke the combat for #2, and then decided that this failure was success for some reason and decided not to fix it. Wonderful, I'll pass.

 

[gring]

soooo... more cover based shooting?

sorry, no thanks.

 

[Irridium]

I agree that the sense of progression was lost man, but I gotta say I found the gradual accuracy increase in ME1 frustrating to deal with. It was like a backwards learning curve, the game got easier towards the end and I always find the first few hours of ME1 a chore due to the clunky aiming. I much preferred how it worked in ME2.

I actually liked it. At the beginning I sucked, but by the end I was awesome. And not because Shepard is special or anything, but because I worked for it. I did the work to make him an accurate, strong, deadly biotic god. I did the work, and I got the benefits, and it was awesome.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

I preferred the ME2 ammo system... I dunno why, I just guess that it feels more satisfying to use your ammo in a more controlled way. In ME1 it was just 'spray into the massive aiming reticule for 5 minutes till the enemy dies' kinda deal... I preferred the more precise and controlled feel in ME2.

I never sprayed. At least not until the end. Well, I did at first, then I started firing in bursts, rather then holding down the trigger. Crappy accuracy made me take my time with my shots and bullets.

With ME2, it felt more like a "wait until enemy pops his head out of cover, then shoot it" thing. Yeah it was precise, but I didn't like it that much. I have my fill of cover based shooting with Gears and Uncharted, I don't feel like playing another.

Although if they introduced destructible cover... that would be something to help spice up combat.

 

[Quellist]

To all the FPS enthusiasts who dont like RPG fans moaning about ME2 i ask you this. How would you feel if the next Call of Duty/Crysis/whatever was announced as having Turnbased strategy 'elements' and in fact turned out to be 90% TBS and only 10% Shooter and then when the next sequel was underway all the devs could talk about was the new unit commands available for the TBS sections?

Pretty pissed off i suspect.

Most Bioware fans were fans long before the Xbox 360/PS3 came along and were followers of the RPG genre, i think its only natural that as bioware gets more massmarket and ignores its original fanbase they get somewhat antsy, especially as they see a franchise that began as RPG heavy get turned into a shooter with RPG elements stuck on.

 

[Optimystic]

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.

By all the gods I hope you're wrong. How the heck can anyone justify the Hero of the Skyllian Blitz/Butcher of Torfan w/e barely able to aim his/her pistol straight, hack a lock or move a pencil with biotics without getting a nosebleed?

Shepard isn't some nub fresh out of the academy - s/he's saved the galaxy twice. I'd think knowing how to aim a pistol is a skill one would pick up along the way.

 

[Irridium]

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.

By all the gods I hope you're wrong. How the heck can anyone justify the Hero of the Skyllian Blitz/Butcher of Torfan w/e barely able to aim his/her pistol straight, hack a lock or move a pencil with biotics without getting a nosebleed?

Shepard isn't some nub fresh out of the academy - s/he's saved the galaxy twice. I'd think knowing how to aim a pistol is a skill one would pick up along the way.

The way I see, Shepard was fighting an enemy he/she has never encountered before. He does not know how to fight them.

The way its translated to you, is by not being accurate or very good. As Shepard learns to fight the Geth, your learning how to play. You both learn and get better in tandem.

 

[Korey Von Doom]

As I've told everyone, bioware's progression is obvious, Mass Effect, Awesome, Dragon Age Origins, Awesome, Mass Effect 2, Meh, Dragon Age 2, Very Meh, I can see no other outcome but ME3 and DA3 being terrible.

 

[GoodApprentice]

For ME3, they will mainly focus on planetary resource surveying.