I remember reading about how they redid the combat system in Dragon Age 2 also, and made it "so much better and more interactive" when the only difference I noticed was them hitting the fast forward button... So, not sure what to think about this.
No "Meaningless Stat Games" in Mass Effect 3
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Nice trollHyper-space said:
So you dislike the things which define an RPG and obviously don't enjoy them in their pure form ("accountant's work"). You see RPG conventions as being the equivalent of ealy 1900s starting handles. Well, that's your opinion - if you don't like the genre this much and just want a pure twitch shooter, then just buy one. No-one is forcing you to buy RPGs. Mass Effect is a sweet middle ground between an RPG and Shooter. The balance was fine in ME1/2 - I disagree in equal measure with people who want to add RPG elements to ME3 and those who want to remove them.
And anyway, why the hate for people who ask for a little thinking challenge in their game? I mean come on - ME2 hardly needs a Doctorate to play. Really dude, this rant against anything that needs a brain to play makes you look just a bit insecure. I mean, people here asking for one game, just one game a year that does not test solely your twitch reflex makes them "elitist dicks"?
From this I can safely assume that;
A) No more resource mining and,
B) EXP is rewarded for each individual kill as opposed to at the end of each mission/ focused action (such as hacking)
I can also assume that the ME1 level up system gone-gone with no chance of returning but I'm hoping the level up system is more involved/ deep than it was in ME2.
A) No more resource mining and,
B) EXP is rewarded for each individual kill as opposed to at the end of each mission/ focused action (such as hacking)
I can also assume that the ME1 level up system gone-gone with no chance of returning but I'm hoping the level up system is more involved/ deep than it was in ME2.
With the same overloards. The teams do not decide what game to make (in terms of which audience it appeals to). The Mad Doctors (Muzyka and Zeschuk) do. They in turn sold out to EA in 2007. And EA, like any corporation, is not happy with 4 million enthusiastic customers in Dragon Age, and 5 million enthusiastic customers in Mass Effect. It's got to be 10 million per IP - whether enthusiastic or not is irrelevant. BioWare is no longer "by gamers for gamers". It's a corporate juggernaut that just wants more sales in all IPs, regardless of customer satisfaction. We got our first warning with DA2. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.Hijax said:
I don't actually like shooting people in games. I spent most of the KotoR's trying to avoid comabt, ME2 doesn't let you do this and so I dislike it. It's still a good game though
For instance the last choice of the game was to keep or destroy incredibly valuable alien technology, which could directly influence the oncoming war that would destroy the galaxy, in a way which you'd already been forced to do repeatedly in the game.
But if you choose to keep it, there;s no option to reveal it's existence to the proper authorities (You've still go the Normandy, one ride with your friend Andersson and there is no way in heck the Council and Alliance wouldn't do everything they could to help you and stop Cerberus) and the game acts like you've made an evil decision and all your party members (including Ceberus lovers who advised you to keep it) ***** at you.
They aren't however, for some reason Bioware forgot creative in environments whilst making their third person shooter. Most of ME2 is a brown junkyard. (Exceptions go to the awesome Omega even if it does fit the stereotypical dark well and Jacobs loyalty mission). And it managed messy moral decisions, to an extent I've never seen in a game, but then robbed them of all impact and shoe horned them into good and bad.stoprequesting said:
For instance the last choice of the game was to keep or destroy incredibly valuable alien technology, which could directly influence the oncoming war that would destroy the galaxy, in a way which you'd already been forced to do repeatedly in the game.
But if you choose to keep it, there;s no option to reveal it's existence to the proper authorities (You've still go the Normandy, one ride with your friend Andersson and there is no way in heck the Council and Alliance wouldn't do everything they could to help you and stop Cerberus) and the game acts like you've made an evil decision and all your party members (including Ceberus lovers who advised you to keep it) ***** at you.
Which would be fine if Shepard was a fresh recruit but considering he's supposed to be the best humanity has to offer and is ready to join the Spectres at the START of the game the fact he can't shoot straight just never made sense to me. Which leads back to my original point that I dislike an invisible die dictating my actions instead of me. I shouldn't have to grind my way through half the game just so my bullets follow the cross hair.uc.asc said:
I would like to add the progression that characters take. They steadily gain power throughout the course of the game. It really allows for a sense of accomplishment.Therumancer said:
He has a very good point. You have to draw the line somewhere. ME2 was not a RPG. The only reason it got labeled as such was the dev behind it, Bioware. Explain to me what made it a RPG. Not trying to be mean, I'm just trying to spark discussion.The.Bard said:
Do you have to post the exact same post in every Mass Effect thread? Newsflash: nobody cares about the 'core audience of RPG gamers' but themselves.Therumancer said:
It does however never ceases to amuse me how people can get so hung up on the icredibly inane question of whether Mass Effect is an RPG or not. It's one of the most pointless arguments I've ever seen and it only exists because there are these incredibly annoying 'purists' who act incredibly elitist and think they're entitled to all sorts of things. I sincerely hope that group of people finally realise nobody is going to releases a game that will 'rise' to their standards and just give up gaming.
Again, I'm still curious as to where she said anything about removing features that were present in ME2. Nowhere does she say anything along the lines of "We're removing stats that were present in ME2", only that they're making an effort to make sure that all the stats that are present in ME3 and changes to them are meaningful.9_6 said:
If anything this make more sense in the context that they're adding new features, and wish to ensure that they're meaningful to gameplay.
Let's see... You customize a character, you pick a class, you gather party members, you complete quests, you earn experience and level up, you gain new items and abilities, you make choices based on your character's alignment, you explore a universe filled with rich lore...RedEyesBlackGamer said:
Nevermind, I forgot you do all those things in Gears of War. I guess it isn't an RPG after all.
Is that an excuse for shoddy work? That's like saying "Never mind the fact that my Chrysler Sebring is a piece of crap, I'm going to buy another Chrysler because it was built by a different team".Hijax said:
Regardless of the dev team, it is the same mgmt team that called the shots.
(for the record, I don't own a Sebring, but I've driven them as rental cars and they are pieces of crap)
Customizing a character's appearance isn't a RPG element, you stopped earning individual experience points and get them at the end of a "mission", leveling was butchered (less abilities, half the level cap, you can max out everything except one slot by end game), oh yes the handful of guns you pick up totally qualifies as looting, you have a point here (still how many RPGs let you do this? Is it really a element?), and what game world doesn't let you experience the world it has created?Fanboy said:Let's see... You customize a character, you pick a class, you gather party members, you complete quests, you earn experience and level up, you gain new items and abilities, you make choices based on your character's alignment, you explore a universe filled with rich lore...RedEyesBlackGamer said:
Nevermind, I forgot you do all those things in Gears of War. I guess it isn't an RPG after all.
In conclusion, a shooter with RPG elements.
EDIT: The supposed choices you make never really have an effect on the narrative.
No, I'm complaining how the narrative is at odds with the game play and the logic behind the skills effects on game play. While I'm perfectly fine with your Sniper Skill effecting how much your scope sways (thats logical) while aiming how does your accuracy with a gun effect the direction the bullet leaves the barrel? Seriously, how does your accuracy make the bullet veer off at a 20 degree angle when the sights are on the enemies head? Especially when the Infiltrator class description says your pretty much an expert with a Sniper.Vibhor said:
While wind and gravity have an effect on normal bullets the in game codex says the guns of Mass Effect are essentially all rail guns/magnetically accelerated. The rounds are traveling at such high speeds that there shouldn't be time for wind and gravity to have an effect and even if they still did does maxing out your sniper skill somehow give you dominion over wind and gravity? THATS what I mean by an invisible die dictating things, sometimes to the point it defies logic.
The only explanation I can think of is that Shepard's been using wonky sights for the beginning of the first game. Which supports my earlier Back to Boot Camp claim because the best humanity has to offer is apparently a fresh faced new recruit instead of the Sole Survivor of Akuze or the War Hero of Elysium or the Ruthless commander at Torfan.
I still enjoy the Mass Effect series don't get me wrong, this is just me over thinking slight niggles I have with the game.
I kinda like the way in ME2 its was just an rpg pretending to be a shooter.Hopeful there will be more strategic aspects and more choices in combat, because it seemed to be move,use special attack shot enemy before they get to you,Although that kinda made the engineer and vanguard class awesome(as long as played on hardcore),also for people that say nay,levelling is a meaning less stats game and an outdated one at that.Its just a method of pacing game length and difficulty that people use because its easy and don't require innovation,.I am a fan of RPGs and think that some do require xp to work and like it .i mean i couldn't imagine fallout 1 without it,but the way its used it kinda lazy(especially in JRPGs) and just to keep old rpg fans happy.
Man I know right? You're supposed to be all badass and stuff, so you should start at level 60. And when you join the specters they should give you all the level 10 specter gear, because that would be much more realistic. We play games to be invincible and instantly kill everything in sight, not because we want a challenge or anything.NickCooley said:
You know what else has been bothering me? Dragon age. How do the characters get recruited into the gray wardens at like level two? Is the guy like "oh yeah, this dude does seven damage so he'd do awesome against an archdemon" or what?
Well, that's nothing new.
The stats were meaningless in ME1 and ME2 anyway, bar a couple of accuracy hacks for ME2 (namely assault rifles).
The stats were meaningless in ME1 and ME2 anyway, bar a couple of accuracy hacks for ME2 (namely assault rifles).
RPGs are made all of the time. But I'm going to call out a game trying to pass itself off as a RPG. Sorry, there are too many games for me to play to give up the hobby. Why do you care about what we complain about? I'm not entitled, by the way. I also have incredibly low standards (I enjoyed Hyperdimension Neptunia).Nimcha said:
